Honoring The Rehabilitation Act of 1973

CAPE-Youth Logo

By Mary Greenfield

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 passed crucial supports for people with disabilities that remain central to the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) system we know today. Known simply as the Rehab Act, this legislation stands on the shoulders of decades of public rehabilitation laws in the United States. In celebration of the anniversary of the Rehab Act, The Center for Advancing Policy on Employment for Youth (CAPE-Youth) honors this legislation by outlining its history and importance for youth and young adults with disabilities.  

A Short History

The earliest acts establishing rehabilitation services in the United States were passed in 1918 and 1920. These rehabilitation acts provided soldiers returning injured from World War I and civilians with disabilities, respectively, access to employment services. While helpful for supporting veterans and some of the general population in obtaining employment, these initial acts limited the provision of VR services to people with specific disabilities.

The federal government passed subsequent amendments to these acts in 1943, 1954, and 1965. Overall, these amendments:

  1. Provided VR services to a greater diversity of disability types;
  2. expanded infrastructure for VR centers;
  3. diversified the types of services VR could offer; and
  4. increased funding for the public VR system as it grew in popularity across the United States.

By the end of the 1960s, the VR system was streamlined to serve tens of thousands of people with disabilities, while its earliest iterations only served thousands. Disability rights activists around this time began lobbying for a renewed focus on serving people with the most significant disabilities.

Enacting the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

In response to these sentiments, President Nixon signed the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. There are seven titles in the Rehab Act. A few of the great things the Rehab Act achieved was:

  • creation of Independent Living Services Program; the Centers for Independent Living Program; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research;
  • renewed focus on VR service delivery to people with the most significant disabilities;
  • customization of VR services to meet the individual needs of people with disabilities; and
  • reduction of physical barriers to attaining employment.

Section 504

One of the reasons the Rehab Act is so famous is found in Title V. This title is a civil rights provision – the first civil rights legislation for people with disabilities in the United States. The standards established in this title were used in Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Section 504 of the Rehab Act is particularly important for youth and young adults with disabilities, the focus of CAPE-Youth’s work.

Section 504 states:

No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 705(20) of this title, shall, solely by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service.

Simply, Section 504 makes it illegal for the government, and any program or organization using government funding, to discriminate against individuals with disabilities in employment practices or in program participation.

Regulations for enforcing Section 504 of the Rehab Act were only passed after a protest movement of the disability community. The movement included many young adults and people from varied backgrounds who demanded 504’s implementation and full civil rights.

Equal Access to Education

The education system is one of the largest entities in the United States receiving federal funds. For youth and young adults with disabilities, Section 504 requires education systems to provide reasonable accommodations to promote equal access to all aspects of the educational experience while in school.

Outside of the classroom, Section 504 regulations mandate the accessibility of school buildings and facilities to students with disabilities. In the classroom, Section 504 defines a qualifying student with a disability. This definition serves as the guideline for who has access to receiving a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Providing a FAPE entails accommodating students with disabilities so they can participate and benefit from the educational environment to the same extent as nondisabled students. Because of Section 504, schools now identify students that are eligible for specialized accommodations because of their disability, then outline what services should be provided. Schools also have procedures in place to evaluate the effectiveness of supports and rework accommodations if needed.

A 504 plan is a document outlining the accommodations, interventions, and resources a student with a disability needs to successfully perform in a generalized education setting. This is usually administered by school staff in consultation with a 504 team made up of teachers, guidance counselors, and a parent/guardian. A 504 plan operates similarly to an Individualized Education Program (IEP), but outlines changes that can be made to the learning environment instead of accommodations related to the curriculum.

When students reach the postsecondary level, or college, many of the federally mandated supports from the high school level no longer apply. However, these students with disabilities are still protected under Section 504, which requires Institutions of Higher Education receiving federal assistance to provide necessary supports for students with documented disabilities. Postsecondary accommodations under 504 are available through an application process, which vary depending on institutional requirements. Generally, students share any documentation of their disability with a disability services representative and work with them to determine what they need for success in a postsecondary environment.

Equal Access to Workforce Services

Section 504 also has implications for students entering the workforce. It says that employers who receive federal funding (i.e., covered employers) cannot discriminate against qualified applicants with a disability. For example, Section 504 limits covered employers from asking medical questions about a disability during the job application process.

Section 504 also requires covered employers to provide reasonable workplace accommodations and supports to employees with disabilities, as needed and requested, as long as the accommodations will not create an undue hardship. Regulations also prohibit an employer from retaliating against employees who ask for accommodations. The protections and requirements of Section 504, paired with the vocational training resources put in place by other sections of the Rehabilitation Act, provide a network of resources for youth and young adults with disabilities to access the workforce.

To learn more about the protections of Section 504, click here. To stay up to date with CAPE-Youth, follow @CSG_CAPEYouth on Twitter/X and like CAPE-Youth on Facebook. If you have questions about the policies or programs in your state that support youth and young adults with disabilities, check out our website or submit a free request for technical assistance.

OVI releases resources for supporting voters in military service, their families and US citizens living abroad

The Overseas Voting Initiative has released two resources to help election officials support military service members, their family members and U.S. citizens living abroad who are interested in voting from abroad. Both publications were developed in collaboration with our working group of state and local election officials and the U.S. Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program.

The first resource is a toolkit for state and local election officials that are building relationships with military installations in their community. Titled “Toolkit: Building Relationships with Local Installations,” this resource provides seven tools that can be used to build lasting relationships with military bases. It also includes a helpful email template for outreach to the voting assistance officer assigned to the military base near you.

Building Relationships with Local Installations

The second resource outlines a series of best practices for websites that support military service members, their families and U.S. citizens living abroad. These nine best practices highlight how states can ensure that their election websites provide the most utility for these voters. By ensuring valuable information can be found online, these voters who may not be able to call during regular business hours will be able to answer questions they may have.

Best Practices for State UOCAVA Web Pages

For questions, please contact [email protected] or Casandra Hockenberry at [email protected].

Relaunch of The National Center for Interstate Compacts Database

The Council of State Governments National Center for Interstate Compacts has relaunched its national database of interstate compacts. The database tracks more than 2,000 interstate compact enactments from nearly 300 different compacts which date back to the founding of the United States. In addition to compact enactment data, the database provides pertinent information regarding interstate compacts and commissions, including the compact model language and the name and website of the commission associated with the compact.

The National Center for Interstate Compacts is one of the most longstanding programs at CSG, providing technical assistance in the development of numerous interstate compacts. In addition, the National Center for Interstate Compacts seeks to educate CSG membership and the public functions of interstate compacts.

According to CSG Chief Public Policy Officer Shawn Jurgensen, the National Center for Interstate Compacts Database will contribute to the success of CSG in the field of interstate compacts and help promote innovative forms of interstate cooperation.

“Some of the greatest policy achievements in the history of the United States have been a result of interstate compacts,” said Jurgensen. “The driver’s license, metropolitan transportation systems in New York City and Washington, D.C., and numerous interstate projects on the protection of natural resources have all been developed through interstate compacts. By providing policymakers and our members with the most comprehensive database on interstate compacts available, we greatly enhance our ability to serve state leaders as they develop innovative interstate solutions. The Council of State Governments is the national leader in interstate compacts and this database will ensure we remain state government’s go-to source in this essential policy area.”

This database will be the most comprehensive collection of interstate compact data available and will allow the public to research interstate compact enactments which span 21 different policy areas and include enactments from every state as well as numerous U.S. territories and Canadian provinces.

CSG staff worked alongside Jeff Litwak, general counsel to the bi-state Columbia River Gorge Commission, adjunct professor of law at Lewis and Clark Law School and contributor to the American Bar Association’s casebook on interstate compact law, to gather information for the database.

“There are numerous resources aggregating the practice and law of interstate compacts, but they are not a substitute for CSG’s database,” said Litwak. “The database is my go-to source for compacts, where I can get copies of states’ enactments and compare them, make lists of compacts for legal briefs and send my students to start their research. The database has also been cited in several court decisions, so we know judges are finding it. It is one of the most valuable compact resources for empirical research.”

CSG invites policymakers, researchers and the public to utilize our database for their work and to gain knowledge on interstate compacts and their impact on shaping the landscape of public policy throughout the country. The National Center for Interstate Compacts hopes that the relaunch of the National Center for Interstate Compacts Database will promote new discussions around interstate compacts so we encourage those who visit the database to provide feedback on how it can better serve their needs.

Proposed Enhancements to the National Apprenticeship System

By Joe Paul and Mary Wurtz

On Jan. 17, the Office of the Federal Register published a notice of proposed rulemaking from the U.S. Department of Labor titled “National Apprenticeship System Enhancements.” The proposed rule changes present a range of updates to 29 CFR Part 29, the regulations governing apprenticeship labor standards and the National Apprenticeship System. The 60-day period for public comment on the proposed regulations closes March 18.

The proposed changes are summarized in three subparts, as a resource for policymakers, apprenticeship professionals and others to make informed comments before the deadline passes.

Subpart A addresses proposed changes to the definitions and standards for registered apprenticeship programs. Primarily, proposed changes under section 29.8 reinforces current apprenticeship standards, requiring a minimum of 2,000 on-the-job training hours for all programs and 144 related instruction hours per each 2,000 hours on the job. Amendments in subpart A also seek to standardize and centralize existing practices for program registration, the signing of apprenticeship agreements and more.

Subpart A also updates definitions for key components of registered apprenticeship and adds definitions for terms like “pre-apprenticeship,” which have been used by the federal government for several years but never formally added to regulations. Proposed changes also clarify the requirements for an occupation to be deemed “suitable” for apprenticeship and the federal government’s ultimate authority in determining an occupation’s suitability.

Subpart B, beginning with proposed section 29.24, was developed in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education to increase student apprenticeship capacity. Acknowledging participation of high-school-aged youth in registered apprenticeships has been limited. The goal is to expand apprenticeship opportunities for high school and postsecondary students. Subpart B introduces core requirements that blend labor standards and industry skillsets into career and technical education (CTE) apprenticeship programs. This requires coordination with each state’s CTE and apprenticeship registration agency to increase the development and registration of CTE-based apprenticeship programs.

Emphasizing the skills found in industry frameworks, the model increases related instruction hours and on-the-job training targeting youth, specifically those aged 16-24, in high school or already engaged in postsecondary education. The programs will be aligned with Perkins CTE programs, and state CTE agencies will play a critical role in their development and implementation. The apprentice will gain industrywide skills, recognized postsecondary credentials and pathways to employment, the types of registered apprenticeships outlined in Subpart A, and opportunities for further education.

Subpart C reflects the Department of Labor’s emphasis on data collection and the related metrics of success. The subpart acknowledges that technological advances have led to increased emphasis on data-driven decision-making and the role of the Registered Apprenticeship Data and Program Information Data System (RAPIDS) in enhancing collection, reporting and analysis capabilities. The changes include collecting individual participant information, tracking apprentice progress and new measures for evaluating success. Within the proposed changes, the Department of Labor recognized concerns with information disclosure, privacy and data protection while balancing the need to enhance the existing apprenticeship data systems.

Subpart C also outlines recognition for the responsibilities of state apprenticeship agencies, duties and functions of state apprenticeship agencies — including an apprenticeship state plan — and reciprocity issues that may arise with registration. The proposed rulemaking also includes requirements for state apprenticeship agencies to submit quarterly apprentice and sponsor data to RAPIDS, with the goal of improving data quality, increasing agency transparency and providing accountability within registered apprenticeships.

All proposed changes by the Department of Labor seek to align the U.S. National Apprenticeship System with international labor best practices and recent research on registered apprenticeship programs. Employers, policymakers, apprentices, labor organizations and others can submit comments on the proposed rule changes by March 18.

For questions, please contact Mary Wurtz via email at [email protected] or Joe Paul at [email protected].

Artificial Intelligence in the States: Emerging Legislation

Since 2019, 17 states have enacted 29 bills focused on regulating the design, development and use of artificial intelligence. These bills primarily address two regulatory concerns: data privacy and accountability. Legislatures in California, Colorado and Virginia have led the way in establishing regulatory and compliance frameworks for AI systems.

Continue reading

Artificial Intelligence in the States: Challenges and Guiding Principles for State Leaders

For years now, the use of artificial intelligence has been ingrained into the everyday lives of Americans through iPhones, social media and even email platforms. A 2018 study by OpenAI revealed the amount of computational power used for AI training has doubled every year since 2012. Due to AI’s rapid advancement, state policymakers must determine how their states must address the significant regulatory challenges posed by AI.

Continue reading

Artificial Intelligence in the States: Harnessing the Power of AI in the Public Sector

As AI systems advance, concerns grow regarding the safety and effectiveness of these tools as well as the potential impacts of these systems on the workforce and the economy. Although private sector uses of AI garner much attention, these systems are also used by the public sector to streamline service provision and support public officials in fields such as law enforcement, elections, transportation, public finance and government administration.

Continue reading

Schoolhouse to Statehouse

Elected educators’ policy work places students first

By Maggie Mixer and Abeer Sikder

From classrooms to Capitols, a nationwide community of state leaders serve as educational advocates on their chamber floors. They drew inspiration from real-world experiences and outstanding students that left lasting impacts during their previous — and even ongoing — careers as teachers, professors and school administrators. 

Despite having a diverse set of backgrounds and experiences, the policy work of nine state legislators is rooted in one common cause: students. 

Kentucky Rep. Kim Banta, a former teacher, principal and assistant superintendent, noted that educators are deeply in touch with their communities and the day-to-day challenges faced by students and their families. 

“Teaching is an amazing boot camp for most other things that you can do in life that might be stressful or difficult,” Banta said. “[Educators] have their fingers on the pulse of what the struggles are, what problems people are having … because you see every single segment of society [in schools].” 

The 17-year teaching career of California Sen. Susan Rubio went beyond the classroom, as she helped students and their families navigate housing and food insecurity, language barriers and more. 

“As an educator, I was exposed to so many of the issues our community members were facing,” Rubio said. “Early on, a few families came to me for support and help outside the classroom, letting me know they didn’t have funding for supplies … and I would try to connect them with [other] resources [too].” 

Rubio said soon after she learned the true scale of the problem “and, as a teacher, [she] could only do so much.” Rubio decided she wanted to help her community from a broader platform. With access to more resources, she launched her first political campaign. Prior to joining the California Senate, she served Baldwin Park, California, for 13 years as a city clerk and city council member. 

Other state leaders, such as Virginia Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, were driven to run for office due to specific challenges experienced in the classroom as an educator. Hashmi, who was professor at Reynolds Community College in Richmond, Virginia, also founded the college’s Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. After teaching for nearly 30 years, she put her name on the ballot because she “saw the state government pulling funding and resources away from students and families, and [she] knew that we could do better for thousands of deserving students.” 

Current and former students have been a continuous source of inspiration for these elected officials. While most gave up being full time educators to hold elected office, many still teach part time or make guest appearances at their district’s schools and agree that it remains one of the best parts of their jobs. 

Indiana Sen. Andrea Hunley, who taught high school English before her 10 years as a principal, recounted being inspired by students organizing against gun violence, high schoolers’ talented navigation of artificial intelligence programs and a third-grade class’s sit-in protest for more recess time. According to Hunley, students’ creativity and enterprise are “leaps and bounds ahead of us” and ahead of the legislation currently in place. 

Hunley’s experiences drove her not only to serve as an elected official but to also always focus on creating broad and innovative policy because “we’re legislating for the future and for future generations.” 

“It’s like our legislation never caught up to where our kids are,” Hunley said. “If we legislate in a way that we think like teachers … we plant seeds for today so that they can bloom tomorrow. We would legislate very differently as we think about generational impact, which is what teachers do every single day.” 

Once elected, many of these legislators continued to draw substantive lessons, as well as inspiration, from their time as educators. Among the most important skills, though, was interacting and communicating with others in an effective manner. 

Hashmi compared serving constituents and students, discussing the importance of being “timely, responsive and informed about how to resolve constituent concerns.” She added that it has improved her ability to engage with colleagues as she strives to “focus on the nuances of arguments” and “bring as much background and information as [she] can to influence the understanding of others.”

Pennsylvania Sen. Dave Argall took a unique path compared to most other legislators, entering elected office before becoming an educator. While serving in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and later in the Senate, he took night classes for 13 years to earn his master’s degree and doctorate in public administration. 

As an instructor, Argall returned to teach night classes as a state and community college instructor. It was there he acquired the ability to concisely present complicated issues to his constituents. 

“When you’re meeting with college students one night a week for 15 weeks, you learn how to condense a lot of information.” Argall said. “I think that practice has been really helpful to me [when] meeting with constituents at town hall meetings.” 

Listening respectfully is another side of communication legislators learned from their classroom experiences. Indiana Sen. Fady Qaddoura teaches courses on civic engagement and executive leadership as an adjunct faculty member in Indianapolis. In his experience, receiving critique on projects in academia as a doctoral student and researcher taught him the important role that diverse perspectives play in the process of creating high-quality work. 

“[This perspective] helps us build bridges of trust among legislators to understand that when we raise a question or concern, it is not politically motivated,” Qaddoura said. “It comes from a genuine concern about the policy that is being debated or discussed.” 

Qaddoura’s approach helped shape how he interacts with other senators and last year contributed to colleagues nominating him for the Indiana Senate’s annual civility award. 

Similarly, Iowa Sen. Jeff Taylor — even as a member of a majority caucus — said he works to listen to everyone on the Senate floor. After many years as a professor, academic and author, he believes that there is always more to be learned from others. 

“I make it clear [to students] that they’re free to disagree if they don’t see things the way I see it; I’m not going to hold it against them,” Taylor said. “I think I borrow that approach of fairness and objectivity from the classroom while on the Senate floor and in committee meetings.” 

Rubio found that her experiences listening to and balancing the different perspectives of 30 students in a classroom greatly informed her ability to “create policy that’s sensitive to everyone’s needs.” In a large, diverse state like California, this crucial skill has helped her understand where her community fits in massive, statewide bills. 

Many legislators who held administrative positions, like principals and superintendents, reflected on how listening was one of many skills they learned as educators that improved their ability to collaborate, especially with colleagues across the aisle. Banta and several of her colleagues with backgrounds in education work hard to build consensus, which she attributed to their experiences in education environments where “it was never my way or the highway.” 

“We [educators] tend to listen a little bit better and we tend to be problem solvers and we try to get everybody on board,” Banta said. “You always have to work with people and come to some kind of consensus [as a principal] and I think that transfers right into this job.” 

Wisconsin Rep. Dave Considine described how the goal of educational environments and improvement, not perfection, informed his approach to collaboration. Considine, a special education teacher for nearly 30 years, credits the patience he has brought to the Legislature for enabling him to stay focused on moving forward — no matter how slowly. 

“[Politics can be] a step forward, then maybe a step or two back, and then another big step forward, and then maybe half a step back,” Considine said, drawing parallels to his teaching tenure. “You don’t change behaviors overnight. That was my specialty, and so I’m used to that.” 

For many legislators, education offered an avenue to acquire strategies now utilized for policy development. Curriculum development is among those strategies. Often data driven, this specific process is one that helped prepare many of the nine legislators for life in office. 

According to Delaware Rep. Sherae’a Moore, a former English teacher, data-driven curriculum development “translates well into the legislative process.” 

“Evidence-based policymaking is crucial for achieving effective and equitable outcomes and [limiting] unintended consequences,” Moore said. “By being on the front lines, we understand that the educational systems are intricate, involving multiple stakeholders and layers of governance. This experience prepares us to navigate complex policy landscapes as we are the ones witnessing the impact of policies directly in the classroom.” 

Moore has integrated this approach into her work in the statehouse by using “data to drive any type of decision making, before [she] even drafts legislation,” to ensure that the policies she proposes fit the needs of her constituents. 

Educational experiences can also form legislators’ outlooks on the connections between different issues. Argall described sharing the view of his predecessor — another long-time educator — on the “spaghetti bowl theory of government” that “everything is related to everything.” 

For Argall, the perspective of his predecessor impacted his approach to identifying and creatively addressing problems. In 2003, After seeing the “very tight correlation” between the availability of good jobs and a community’s education level as a community college instructor, he organized the conversion of an abandoned junior high school into a community college center. 

“The building had been around since, I think, the 1920s, and was just sitting kind of sad, empty and beginning to deteriorate,” Argall said. “Sometimes in this job, you just need to bring the right people to the table.” 

Through the combined efforts of the community college, the local government, Argall’s office and a private foundation, they not only converted the building into a new education center but also funded the incoming class’s tuition. 

“I can still see the faces of the parents when [former Pennsylvania Gov. Mark Schweiker] made the announcement about free tuition for two years,” Argall said. “The parents understood the power of that moment and we literally changed lives that day.” 

The project helped “breathe new life” into local students’ futures and the surrounding community, a central goal of Argall’s efforts around Pennsylvania, which have also included a series of anti-blight laws. 

The transition from education to elected office was not necessarily a career switch for these nine legislators. Rather, it presented a new side of the same path of service that they were already walking. Education placed them on the front lines of their communities and helped teach them how to effectively work with and for others — lessons that they have brought into elected office to continue to serve current and future generations. 

“We give that level of support to our kids because we genuinely, and in a loving and compassionate way, want our kids to be better than us,” Qaddoura said. “Imagine if you can extend that feeling — to give them the best of who you are so that they can live better lives — to the rest of the population and to your fellow citizens.” 

Evolving CSG, Dept. of Defense Initiative Continues Enhancing Accessibility for U.S. Military, Overseas Voters

By Morgan Thomas

The Overseas Voting Initiative continues to conduct research, analyze Uniformed Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act voter data, and cultivate dialogue surrounding innovative strategies to enhance voter accessibility through the act. 

The OVI is a collaboration between The Council of State Governments and the Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance Program focused on improving voting access for U.S. military and overseas voters. 

Service members, their families and other U.S. citizens residing overseas face many challenges when trying to obtain and cast their ballots in U.S. elections. Service members deployed to remote areas, students studying abroad or government workers working abroad in difficult-to-access locations must overcome hurdles to exercise their right to vote. Mail operations can be intermittent or even nonexistent in some locations. Power, and therefore access to electronic communications, can also be unreliable. 

Voters facing any of these challenges are protected under the Uniformed Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, which is also commonly referred to as UOCAVA. UOCAVA was enacted by Congress in 1986 and provides U.S. citizens and their eligible family members a legal basis for absentee voting requirements. Each U.S. citizen abroad faces unique challenges, making it difficult for both the voter and election officials. 

The Overseas Voting Initiative works with local and state election officials who comprise its OVI Working Group. The Working Group is divided into subgroups that focus on specific areas of interest centered on improving voting accessibility for UOCAVA voters. Through these subgroups, the OVI has conducted research, promoted technology and policies, informed state policymakers about overseas voting issues, and shared best practices with state and local election officials and other stakeholders. Some critical areas of research include: 

UOCAVA balloting solutions. 

Improving communications and connections between UOCAVA citizens and their election offices. 

Making voter registration easier for UOCAVA citizens. 

Considering how DOD digital signature capabilities can facilitate document signing by certain UOCAVA voters. 

Examining how the ballot duplication process can be improved through transparent standard operating procedures and new technologies. 

In addition to these areas of research, the OVI has also created a data standard for the Election Administration and Voting Survey, or EAVS, Section B Data. This standard allows election officials and the Federal Voting Assistance Program to conduct a deeper analysis of UOCAVA voter behavior. The Working Group analyzes and makes recommendations for changes to EAVS Section B Data to improve the survey to serve the voters and election officials better. 

Now in its 10th year, the OVI has conducted more than 27 Working Group meetings in 14 states and U.S. territories, one U.S. Embassy, and visited 11 military installations. In early spring 2024, the OVI will be releasing a series of modules identifying best practices for communicating with military service members, their families and citizens living abroad.