VR and SE Monitoring and Technical Assistance Guide

State Vocational Rehabilitation Services

and

State Supported Employment Services

Programs

Monitoring and

Technical Assistance Guide

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services

Rehabilitation Services Administration

State Monitoring and Program Improvement Division

October 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Monitoring Objective, Values, and Scope ............................................................................................. 2

II. Process Overview ................................................................................................................................... 5

III. Performance of the State VR Services and State SE Services Programs ...................................... 13

IV. Financial Management of the State VR Services and SE Services Programs .............................. 25

APPENDIX A: VR Program Accountability Model .............................................................................. 33

APPENDIX B: VR Agency Required Documentation .......................................................................... 37

APPENDIX C: Performance Tables ....................................................................................................... 43

APPENDIX D: Fiscal Tables ................................................................................................................... 63

I. Monitoring Objective, Values, and Scope

A. Objective and Values

Consistent with the requirement in Section 107(a) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

(Rehabilitation Act), as amended by Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act

(WIOA), to conduct annual reviews and periodic on-site monitoring of programs authorized

under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act, the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) has

collaborated previously with State vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies in the development of

the Monitoring and Technical Assistance Guide (MTAG). RSA also engaged VR agency

representatives in the development of this MTAG, which has a specific focus on the performance

of VR agencies in the use and expenditure of Federal funds to maximize quality employment

outcomes for individuals with disabilities. The objective of monitoring is to support VR agencies

and RSA in improving results for individuals with disabilities seeking high-quality competitive

integrated employment by responding to the unique needs and challenges of individual agencies

and the VR program nationally. Fundamental to this monitoring approach are values shared by

RSA and its State partners. RSA is committed to these values as it partners with VR agencies in

the conduct of monitoring to foster continuous improvement in outcomes for individuals with

disabilities. As such, RSA’s monitoring—

• Maximizes results for VR participants;

• Leads to continuous improvement in the VR program;

• Values and supports the Federal/State partnership;

• Focuses on areas designed to meet the needs of VR agencies and RSA;

• Addresses the characteristics and circumstances of individual VR agencies with respect to

the areas reviewed and the conduct of the monitoring;

• Fosters transparent and thoughtful verbal and written communication;

• Promotes the use of and improves the validity and reliability of programmatic and fiscal

data;

• Makes efficient and effective use of RSA and VR agency personnel and time devoted to

the process;

• Delivers accurate, targeted, purposeful, and timely technical assistance, balanced with the

need to assure compliance with fiscal and programmatic requirements; and

• Supports alignment of the public workforce system monitoring protocols and provides

emphasis on coordination and collaboration at the Federal and State Level in evaluating

and reporting performance and compliance across the core programs.

Embodying these values, this MTAG explains the process through which RSA will provide

technical assistance to, and review the progress of, VR agencies in 1) maximizing the

expenditure and use of Federal funds to improve the quality of services for, and employment

outcomes achieved by, individuals with disabilities, and 2) complying with Rehabilitation Act

and other Federal requirements.

B. Scope of Review

1. General

Pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Rehabilitation Act, RSA must conduct periodic on-site

monitoring and annual reviews to determine whether a VR agency is complying substantially

with the provisions of its State Plan under Section 101 and the State Plan Supplement under

Section 606 of the Rehabilitation Act and with the evaluation standards and performance

indicators established under Section 106 of the Rehabilitation Act (which are subject to the

performance accountability measures in Section 116(b) of WIOA and 34 C.F.R. part 361,

subpart E).

The specific programs covered by this MTAG include—

• The State Vocational Rehabilitation Services program (VR program), established under

Title I of the Rehabilitation Act (Title 1, 34 C.F.R. part 361); and

• The State Supported Employment Services program (Supported Employment program),

authorized under Title VI of the Rehabilitation Act (Title VI, 34 C.F.R. part 363).

The return of a substantial amount of unused Federal funds for the VR and Supported

Employment programs has generated the attention and concern of RSA, Congress, and

stakeholders. Thus, RSA will focus its monitoring on identifying the root causes for the return

of unused Federal funds and determining strategies and steps VR agencies may employ to

reverse this trend. Importantly, during the programmatic and fiscal monitoring, RSA will

ensure designated State units are complying with the nondelegable responsibilities for the

administration of the VR and Supported Employment programs described in 34 C.F.R. §

361.13(c)(1). These responsibilities include—

• All decisions affecting eligibility for VR services, the nature and scope of available

services, and the provision of these services;

• The determination to close the record of services of an individual who has achieved an

employment outcome in accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 361.56;

• Policy formulation and implementation;

• The allocation and expenditure of VR funds; and

• Participation as a partner in the one-stop service delivery system established under Title I

of WIOA, in accordance with 20 C.F.R. part 678.

RSA anticipates providing substantial technical assistance during the reviews and limiting

compliance findings generally to those focus areas under review.

2. Focus Areas

When monitoring the VR and Supported Employment programs, teams within the State

Monitoring and Program Improvement Division (SMPID) will address two focus areas while

reviewing the performance and compliance of each VR agency during on-site and off-site

reviews. Generally, these focus areas cover—

• Performance of the VR and Supported Employment programs, including how the VR

agency is implementing strategies and practices to achieve continuous improvement in

the delivery of VR services, including pre-employment transition services, leading to

quality competitive integrated employment and supported employment outcomes for

individuals with disabilities; and

• Financial management of the VR and Supported Employment programs that supports and

maximizes the use of Federal funds and resources to achieve continuous improvement in

assisting individuals with disabilities to achieve quality employment outcomes.

The nature and scope of each focus area, along with the activities to be conducted under each, is

contained in Sections III and IV, respectively, of this MTAG. As a result of the activities

reviewed in each of the focus areas, review teams may identify—

• Strategies, including innovative practices, that VR agencies use or may employ to

improve competitive integrated employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities,

including students and youth with disabilities;

• Recommendations leading to continuous improvement in the number and quality of

outcomes achieved by individuals with disabilities through the VR and Supported

Employment programs;

• Recommendations leading to continuous improvement in the financial management of

fiscal resources and strategies for maximizing the use of Federal grant funds;

• Compliance findings and corrective actions to improve processes and procedures,

including the development or revision of policies and internal controls supporting

effective and efficient program operations, service delivery, and data-based decision

making; and

• Areas of technical assistance that will assist and support VR agencies in developing

strategic action plans to improve and maximize program and fiscal performance and the

use of funds.

3. Other Areas of Review

In general, the review team will conduct monitoring activities related only to those areas of

review described above in B.2. However, a team may, after consulting with the VR agency and

SMPID management, engage in further activities, including the provision of technical assistance,

in areas not covered above, if such areas are of significant concern, and if the VR agency would

benefit from technical assistance through the monitoring or review process. Additionally, when

areas of potential noncompliance, that are outside the specific scope of the MTAG, are identified

through the monitoring process, SMPID may add such areas to the scope of the review to ensure

due diligence related to SMPID’s legal responsibility to ensure compliance.

C. Technical Assistance

To ensure VR agencies and their educational and workforce partners, as appropriate, receive

quality and timely technical assistance services, SMPID consults with: 1) the Office of Special

Education Programs (OSEP) in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; 2)

the Employment and Training Administration and the Office of Disability Employment Policy in

the U.S. Department of Labor; 3) the Administration for Community Living in the U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services; and 4) relevant training and technical assistance

centers and demonstration projects funded by RSA, OSEP, and other Federal agencies regarding

the provision of services for individuals with disabilities, including students with disabilities.

The purpose of this coordinated technical assistance service delivery model is to assist VR

agencies and their partners in providing quality VR and other services to individuals with

disabilities leading to competitive integrated employment. Each technical assistance center

focuses its efforts on a specific set of strategies and practices designed to provide universal,

targeted, and intensive technical assistance to maximize the transition, employment,

independence, and integration into the community of individuals with disabilities.

In FFY 2020, RSA funded three five-year technical assistance centers. They include—

• The Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center for Quality Management

(VRTAC-QM) awarded to San Diego State University for the purpose of providing

training and technical assistance to VR agencies to assist them to manage available staff

and fiscal resources, improve effective service delivery, and increase the number and

quality of employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities;

• The Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center for Quality Employment

(VRTAC-QE) awarded to the University of Wisconsin for the purpose of providing

training and technical assistance to VR agencies to support the implementation of

innovative and effective employment strategies and supporting practices; and

• The National Technical Assistance Center on Transition: The Collaborative (NTACT:C)

jointly funded with OSEP and awarded to the University of North Carolina-Charlotte for

the purpose of providing training and technical assistance to VR agencies and State and

local educational agencies to support the development and implementation of services,

including pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities receiving

services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) or supported by

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act; and transition services to students and youth with

disabilities, including youth who have dropped out of school, are homeless, or are

involved with the juvenile justice system.

Throughout the on-site monitoring or off-site reviews, SMPID’s teams will share with the

Training and Service Programs Division (TSPD) project officers who are responsible for the

administration of the technical assistance centers, the technical assistance needs of VR agencies

that will enable them to take the steps necessary to improve performance and resolve compliance

findings. In turn, TSPD project officers will share information with SMPID review teams about

any intensive and targeted technical assistance provided by the technical assistance centers to the

VR agencies.

RSA strongly encourages VR agencies selected for monitoring to include the VRTAC-QM and

other technical assistance centers, as appropriate, in monitoring and review activities prior to and

during the process to assist in the development and implementation of corrective action plans

(CAP) and strategic action plans focused on maximizing the use of Federal funds to improve

program and fiscal performance. SMPID intends that the technical assistance provided in

conjunction with the monitoring process will reflect a partnership among RSA staff, VR

agencies, and the technical assistance centers to address agency and national VR program areas

of focus, including maximizing the efficient and effective use of funds and resources to ensure

individuals with disabilities achieve quality employment outcomes.

II. Process Overview

A. Agencies for Review

SMPID will use its available resources to conduct off-site reviews and on-site monitoring visits

with VR agencies. RSA will select these VR agencies without specific regard to the recency of

prior reviews; rather, RSA will select VR agencies based on the amount of the State’s Federal

VR allotment the agencies did not expend and their scores on the accountability model.

B. Accountability Model

1. Background

SMPID uses an accountability model to assist in identifying agencies for review and maximizing

the effective use of its resources to administer the VR program. The model is consistent with the

guidelines set forth in the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) Directive titled “Guide

for Managing Formula Grant Programs,” dated August 13, 2019.

2. Accountability Model

The accountability model is comprised of three fiscal factors and one programmatic factor for a

total of four performance indicators, as follows:

• Percentage of the total VR grant appropriation the State’s VR allotment represents;

• Percentage of the State’s Federal VR allotment expended during the year of

appropriation;

• Percentage of the State’s Federal VR allotment expended during the period of

performance; and

• VR program participant percentage change from the two prior Program Years.

Note: SMPID computes all data on a State basis to align the RSA accountability model with the

principles in Title I of WIOA, under which core partners in the workforce development system,

including VR agencies, are required to develop performance targets and report the Annual State

Performance Report at the State level. This method ensures comparability between States with

one combined agency and States with more than one VR agency (general and blind). In making

the calculations, SMPID will review data reported on the Case Service Report (RSA-911) and

relevant financial reports for the most recent period for which complete data are available.

Further details about the Accountability Model can be found in Appendix A.

C. Selection of States

SMPID will use the accountability model and information related to the amount of the State’s

VR allotment that was unused to select VR agencies for either on-site monitoring or off-site

reviews (see Appendix A).

SMPID will assign each VR agency an overall accountability score of one to five, with five

indicating a higher risk score in the identified areas. VR agencies are selected for review based

upon higher overall accountability scores and significant technical assistance needs related to the

expenditure of their Federal VR program allotments. As such, SMPID may monitor a VR agency

that has been monitored more recently.

D. Duration of the Monitoring Process

To the extent possible, SMPID will conclude all on-site monitoring and offsite reviews by the

end of the Federal fiscal year. However, the process for each VR agency under review is not

intended to last the length of the entire Federal fiscal year. The SMPID review team, in

collaboration with the VR agency, will determine the start date of the monitoring process,

accommodating the schedule of the VR agency when possible. The process generally includes

preparation and planning activities, an on-site visit or scheduled off-site meetings, and the

development and issuance of draft and final monitoring reports.

E. Stages of the On-site Monitoring or Off-site Review Process

1. Planning and Preparation

SMPID review teams will contact each VR agency selected for on-site monitoring or off-site

review and request documents and conduct virtual meetings, as needed, in preparation for on-site

monitoring or off-site reviews. In coordination with each selected VR agency, SMPID teams

will—

• Introduce the SMPID team responsible for the review, including the team lead, and have

the VR agency identify its staff who will be involved in the review;

• Select dates for the on-site monitoring visit or the schedule for the off-site review;

• Identify stakeholders and partners to be invited to participate in the review, as

appropriate, including State Rehabilitation Council (SRC) members, the Client

Assistance Program, community rehabilitation programs (CRP), employers, workforce

development partners, educational agencies, and VR agency consumers and their

representatives; and

• Determine the involvement of representatives of the technical assistance centers in the

review and notify them of the review schedule.

Additionally, through virtual meetings or teleconferences, SMPID teams will—

• Discuss the monitoring process and the substance of the focus areas included in this

MTAG with VR agency management, and, as applicable, progress made related to

previous recommendations and findings relevant to the scope of the review;

• Discuss the agency’s current characteristics and situation, such as its organizational

structure and staff capacity, resources for service provision, the State’s economic

conditions and local labor markets, and the agency’s strategic planning goals and

objectives, so that SMPID may synthesize and prioritize discussions and technical

assistance activities tailored to meet significant areas of need;

• Gather information pertinent to the focus areas of the review from representatives of the

VR agency, SRC, and Client Assistance Program, as appropriate; and

• Finalize an agenda, which maximizes efficiency, prioritizes focus areas for discussion,

and respects the VR agency’s investment of time and resources for the on-site monitoring

visit or off-site review.

The SMPID review team will review documents provided by the VR agency in accordance with

the document request related to each focus area prior to the on-site monitoring visit or off-site

review (Appendix B). Specifically, the review team will use the information obtained from these

documents, analyses of program and fiscal data, and the information obtained during the

prereview planning activities described above, to identify, in collaboration with the VR agency,

technical assistance needs and priority focus areas that will culminate in a productive review.

2. On-site Monitoring and Off-site Review Activities

The SMPID team will schedule the on-site monitoring visit or off-site review activities with each

VR agency, when possible, accommodating the schedules of VR agency management and

personnel. The SMPID team will engage in a variety of activities, including, but not limited to—

• A brief entrance meeting to introduce SMPID review team participants and VR agency

management and personnel and to review the on-site monitoring or off-site review

scheduled agenda;

• Relevant discussions with key VR agency personnel in the program performance and

financial management focus areas;

• The review of policies, procedures, practices, or innovative strategies with key personnel

related to the focus areas;

• The review of internal control processes and procedures, particularly as they relate to the

reporting of and expenditure of funds for services;

• The provision of technical assistance requested by the VR agency or recommended by

SMPID and the exploration and development of strategic actions to address areas

identified through the review process; and

• An exit meeting to discuss: 1) information gathered and observed by the review team that

may form the basis for potential recommendations, findings, and technical assistance or

strategic actions. (Note that any reference to potential recommendations and findings is

subject to change based on input from RSA management or other Department offices); 2)

next steps in the process; 3) the need for follow-up teleconferences or activities; and 4)

input and feedback from VR agency management and personnel and other participants in

the review concerning the monitoring process and activities.

The review team or the VR director may invite VR agency management and personnel, the

leadership of the designated State agency (DSA), as applicable, and the chairperson or a

representative of the SRC to participate in both the entrance and exit meetings, as well as any

other activities in which their involvement would be pertinent.

Individuals with whom the review team may engage in discussions related to the focus areas

during the on-site monitoring or off-site review may include—

• VR agency supervisors and counselors;

• State educational agency and local school district staff responsible for providing VR

services to students with disabilities, particularly those students receiving preemployment

transition services;

• The DSA director;

• Other staff from the DSA responsible for fiscal or administrative oversight;

• Commissioners of agencies for the blind or other stand-alone VR agencies;

• Representatives of CRPs, specifically those contracted to provide pre-employment

transition services to students with disabilities;

• Workforce development partners and employers, as appropriate;

• VR agency consumers and their families, as appropriate, and other stakeholders; and

• State auditors.

3. Follow-up Activities

After the on-site monitoring or off-site review activities, the SMPID team may require further

documentation from the VR agency to supplement information obtained prior to or during the

review. Additional teleconferences or virtual meetings may be necessary to clarify any

outstanding questions or concerns the team has or to gather further details about a particular

issue.

F. Draft Report

The review team will develop a draft report containing—

• Analyses, observations, and recommendations to improve VR agency performance in

each focus area;

• Programmatic and fiscal compliance findings and required corrective actions to improve

VR agency management, operations, and outcomes for individuals with disabilities; and

• A brief summary of technical assistance provided during the review as well as plans for

additional technical assistance and strategic actions that will be required after the

conclusion of the review to assist the VR agency in achieving continuous improvement in

maximizing the use of funds and resources to ensure high quality outcomes for

individuals with disabilities.

The SMPID review team will develop and transmit the draft report to the VR agency following

internal review by RSA management and, as needed, relevant departmental or inter-departmental

review. If the review team anticipates delays in the issuance of the draft report, this information

will be shared with the VR agency with the intention of increasing the transparency of the

monitoring process.

Once the draft report is issued, the VR agency will have 15 calendar days to submit written

responses to the draft report. If there are extenuating circumstances, the VR agency may submit

a written request for an extension that must—

• Detail the nature of the extenuating circumstances;

• Include a proposed due date by which the agency could provide its response; and

• Be submitted to SMPID at least five calendar days before the end of the 15 calendar days

provided for the agency’s response.

SMPID will notify the VR agency if a new submission deadline is approved.

The VR agency responses to the draft report should include—

• Identification of factual errors either in a comment inserted in the document, if

substantial, or in redline track changes, if minor, or through an email;

• Responses to any programmatic or fiscal recommendations, compliance findings, and

corrective actions in the designated areas for response in the report;

• The attachment of supporting documentation or data as needed to substantiate VR agency

responses; and

• Requests for technical assistance to carry out the recommendations and corrective actions

identified in the draft report.

If the VR agency would like to schedule a teleconference or a virtual meeting with the SMPID

review team to discuss any aspects of the draft report, the agency should submit a request to the

review lead as quickly as possible after receipt of the draft report. Delays in scheduling this call

do not extend the 15 calendar days the agency has to submit its written response to the draft

report.

G. Final Report

Based on the information the VR agency provides in response to the draft report, the SMPID

review team will develop the final on-site monitoring or off-site review report, making any

needed corrections. The SMPID review team may also modify or eliminate a recommendation,

compliance finding, or corrective action after consulting with RSA/SMPID management, the

Department’s Office of the General Counsel, other Department officials, or other agencies, as

warranted by the VR agency’s response to the draft report.

In addition to the information included in the draft report, the final report will contain the VR

agency’s responses to the draft report and any requests for technical assistance to support the VR

agency in carrying out the recommendations and corrective actions to improve agency

management and operations to maximize the provision of services and the use of funds to ensure

quality employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities. SMPID will include, at its

discretion, documentation or exhibits submitted by the VR agency in support of its responses to

the draft report. The SMPID review team may request additional assurances or documentation

from the VR agency in connection with programmatic or fiscal findings. The final report will

indicate when such material is required. Once completed, the review team will transmit the final

report electronically to the VR agency and the SRC. The VR agency, SRC, and others as

appropriate, will be notified upon publication of the final report on the RSA website.

If the analysis and finalization of a particular finding or findings will unreasonably delay

issuance of the complete final report, SMPID will issue a partial final report containing the

findings for which analysis has been completed. The partial monitoring or review report also will

briefly summarize the findings for which analysis has not been completed and indicate that these

findings will be transmitted through a separate communication or addendum to the partial final

report at a later date.

The final report represents SMPID’s final decision related to the issues identified by the review

team during the monitoring review.

H. Corrective Action Plan

A corrective action plan (CAP) is a step-by-step plan of action that is developed to achieve

targeted outcomes for resolution of identified monitoring findings. Within 45 calendar days from

the issuance of the final report, the VR agency will submit, for SMPID review and approval, a

CAP to address findings identified through the monitoring process to improve the VR agency’s

compliance, performance, and employment outcomes.

RSA, in collaboration with the VR agency to the extent possible, will identify target dates by

which specific corrective action steps will be completed dependent on the specific facts related

to each finding. In most instances, corrective actions should be completed within nine months

following the approval of the CAP. In accordance with 2 C.F.R. § 200.303(d), VR agencies must

“take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including noncompliance

identified in audit findings.” To facilitate the VR agency’s development of the CAP and to

promote consistency in the information contained in the plan, all CAPs will be developed,

approved, and tracked by the SMPID team.

The content of the CAP must include—

• Statement of programmatic or fiscal findings consistent with the final report;

• Steps the VR agency will take to correct the finding(s). What steps will be implemented

and how they will be implemented;

• Timelines for completion of steps;

• Person responsible for ensuring corrective action step is completed; and

• The evidence of success. What evidence will be submitted to demonstrate systemic

correction of the identified issue(s).

The corrective action plan steps must be completed as soon as possible so RSA can document

the VR agency’s correction of identified noncompliance.

The review team will transmit instructions to the VR agency for the submission of its CAP on

the approved CAP form. The VR agency will use the CAP form to provide required quarterly

progress reports on implementing the CAP. The VR agency’s RSA State liaison will notify the

VR agency once the CAP is approved by SMPID.

The first CAP progress report is due to the State Liaison no later than 30 calendar days after the

end of the first full quarter following the approval of the CAP, and then 30 calendar days after

each subsequent quarter is concluded, until all corrective actions are completed, and the CAP is

retired. Following monitoring and implementation of corrective actions, at a defined interval

(e.g., two years), where appropriate, RSA may contact the agency to determine if additional

technical assistance or the conduct of another VR agency review is required.

VR agencies are required to make substantive progress toward the resolution of all findings

within the required timelines. In the event an agency does not make progress toward compliance

through the approved CAP, SMPID, at its discretion, may require the agency to take additional

steps including, but not limited to, revising the CAP steps, timeline, target dates, etc. Depending

on the nature of the findings, SMPID may take additional enforcement action including

assigning specific conditions to the VR grantee’s award(s) or designating the grant as high risk.

In accordance with Department policy, SMPID may not closeout a grant award in compliance

until ALL corrective actions have been successfully resolved.

I. Strategic Action Plan

Specific to the focus areas addressed during on-site monitoring and off-site reviews, the VR

agency should develop and implement a strategic action plan (SAP) to demonstrate how it will

reverse the return of unused funds and maximize the use and expenditure of Federal funds to

improve performance and increase employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities,

including those with the most significant disabilities, as well as how it will ensure the provision

of pre-employment transition services to students with disabilities.

The SAP should—

• Identify causes for unused Federal funds and strategies and activities the VR agency will

undertake to increase and maximize its ability to expend Federal VR and Supported

Employment program grant funds;

• Provide a written workable plan for taking action, which contains a timeline for

implementation that demonstrates results within a reasonable specified time;

• Be supported by documentation (e.g., fiscal reports, data, policies) showing

implementation of the actions and results achieved; and

• Demonstrate a roadmap and commitment for continuous improvement.

The SAP also should describe progress the VR agency made in maximizing the use of Federal

VR and Supported Employment program funds in FFYs 2021 and 2022, if applicable. Given a

State’s history with the return of unused Federal funds, RSA believes it is necessary that the VR

agency under review identify and take strategic actions to address the root causes. In so doing,

the VR agency will be better positioned to develop and implement a solid workable plan that

will lead to continuous improvement in the use and expenditure of available Federal funds to

assist individuals with disabilities.

The SAP should be shared with RSA within 60 calendar days of the receipt of the published

review report. RSA encourages the VR agency to collaborate with the RSA-funded technical

assistance centers, as appropriate, in the development of the SAP. This collaboration can assist

the VR agency in needed technical assistance, the identification and assignment of specific

responsibilities for implementation, and the establishment of timelines. The review team will

review and provide appropriate input regarding the SAP. The VR agency should submit written

updates to the RSA team at least semiannually and the review team will convene teleconferences

or virtual meetings with the VR agency and appropriate staff of the technical assistance centers

to review progress on the SAP and discuss any further technical assistance needs that may have

emerged.

J. Involvement of Consultants in the Review Process

VR agencies, at their discretion, may involve contracted consultants in any or all stages of the

review process, including the exchange of information and conduct of teleconferences or virtual

meetings in preparation for the on-site monitoring visit or off-site review activities, on-site

monitoring or off-site review sessions, follow-up teleconferences or meetings, and the

development of responses to draft reports as well as the development of the CAP or strategic

action plan. During the initial stages of the monitoring process, VR agencies should inform

SMPID about the role of any consultants retained. The review team will direct all

communication to VR agency management and staff, as well as to technical assistance center

representatives and other stakeholders when appropriate, but not to the consultants.

K. Involvement of RSA-Funded Technical Assistance Centers

VR agencies are strongly encouraged to seek the participation of the VRTAC-QM or other

technical assistance centers, as appropriate, in the on-site and off-site monitoring and review

activities. The involvement of the technical assistance centers will enhance their ability to

support the VR agency with targeted or intensive technical assistance in the development and

implementation of strategic actions, which VR agencies may take to maximize the use of funds

and their existing resources to provide services to students with disabilities and VR program

participants that will result in quality employment outcomes.

L. Evaluation of the Review Process

Consistent with RSA’s commitment to continuous improvement, all participants in the

monitoring and technical assistance review process, including VR agency management and

personnel, SRC members, the Client Assistance Program, technical assistance centers, and other

stakeholders, may, at any point in the review process, provide written comment and suggestions

for improvement of the review process to RSA. This feedback may be used to inform future

monitoring activities.

III. Focus Area—Performance of the State Vocational

Rehabilitation Services and State Supported Employment

Services Programs

A. Nature and Scope

SMPID will assess the performance of the State Vocational Rehabilitation Services (VR

program) and State Supported Employment Services program (Supported Employment program)

by reviewing RSA-911 data; will assess the VR agency’s internal controls, including policies

and procedures; and will conduct in-depth interactive discussions with the VR agency and other

appropriate entities. The SMPID review team will consider the unique characteristics and

circumstances of individual VR agencies with respect to their performance during the period

under review. RSA will assist VR agencies with the provision of technical assistance to promote

continuous improvement in the VR and Supported Employment programs, maximize the

provision and quality of services, including pre-employment transition services for students with

disabilities, ensure quality employment outcomes for VR participants, and improve the validity

and reliability of program data to assist the VR agency in making data-driven and strategic

program management decisions.

The data used in the analysis are those collected and reported by the VR agency through the

RSA-911. These data include joint data elements necessary for the calculation of performance

indicators for all core programs in the workforce development system, including the VR

program, established in Title I of WIOA. The analysis is intended to serve as a broad overview

of the performance of the VR and Supported Employment programs administered by the VR

agency and should not be construed as a definitive or exhaustive review of all available VR

program data. The data tables generally measure performance of the VR agency based on data

for individuals with open and closed service records for the most recent three program years.

The analysis will incorporate the data contained in the tables in Appendix C and information

from the RSA data dashboards. SMPID will also review applicable VR agency policies and

procedures, particularly as they relate to the provision and scope of VR services, pre-

employment transition services, supported employment services, and the use and expenditure of

funds, as well as those related to internal controls necessary for the verification of data. The

SMPID team will review quality assurance processes and internal control activities related to the

VR agency’s case service records to assist in assessing the effectiveness of a VR agency’s

internal controls for the accuracy and validity of its data.

The SMPID review team will examine VR agency data and a variety of other resources,

including the VR services portion of the Unified or Combined State Plan, to analyze the VR

agency’s performance. For example, SMPID will assess the efficacy of policies and services

provided to eligible individuals with disabilities by reviewing the quality of employment

outcomes, including such factors as hours worked, earnings, and the receipt of other benefits.

Also, the examination of data related to attrition and reasons for exit may shed light on the

engagement of individuals with disabilities in the VR process. Reviewing the percentage of

individuals with disabilities served with particular types of impairments may be indicative of

decisions made by VR agency management based on the results of the comprehensive statewide

needs assessment (CSNA) and other information. In particular, the review team will look at

policies and program data in combination with fiscal data to formulate a picture of the VR

agency’s expenditure and use of funds to promote services leading to quality employment

outcomes for individuals with disabilities. The SMPID team will also review the VR agency’s

performance on the WIOA performance indicators established in Section 116(b) of WIOA,

discussing any issues related to reliability and validity of the data and the potential effect on the

State and VR agency negotiated levels of performance, as applicable. SMPID will provide

technical assistance as necessary or upon request.

The SMPID review team will share data tables with the VR agency prior to the on-site

monitoring visit or off-site review. Throughout the review process, SMPID will engage the VR

agency in discussions related to factors that may inform or explain performance considering any

unique circumstances experienced by the VR agency. As a result of its analysis and discussions

with key VR agency officials and staff, SMPID may develop recommendations intended to assist

the VR agency in its efforts to improve performance in identified areas, specifically those areas

related to the use and expenditure of funds for the provision of services, including

preemployment transition services. Generally, compliance findings will not be generated by the

analysis unless, for example, SMPID finds that the VR agency lacks sufficient internal controls,

VR agency policies or procedures reviewed in conjunction with the performance analysis are not

consistent with Federal requirements governing the VR program, or program data are not

accurately tracked and reported.

B. Analysis of the Performance of the VR and Supported Employment

Programs

During the on-site monitoring or off-site review process, the SMPID team will conduct an

analysis and joint discussion with the VR agency of the performance of the VR and Supported

Employment programs guided by the questions below. These questions are intended to generate

meaningful discussions and may lead to additional questions or areas for exploration,

particularly as they relate to the scope and provision of services and the expenditure and use of

funds.

VR Agency Profile

Resources: Appendix C

• Table 1—VR Agency Profile

The VR agency profile provides a summary of data that is designed to capture some of the most

salient information about the VR agency’s performance in the most recently completed program

years. Among the data represented are the number of applicants and eligible individuals, the

number of participants, the VR agency’s employment rate, the number of individuals with

disabilities who achieved competitive integrated employment or supported employment, data

related to VR process efficiency and services, and data on the WIOA performance indicators.

Questions:

1. What impressions does the VR agency have regarding its performance? Does the VR

agency have any unique circumstances or issues that have affected its overall

performance as reflected in the profile?

2. Does the VR agency experience challenges or barriers related to the number of applicants

or individuals served in the VR program? If so, what are they?

3. Has the VR agency experienced a downward trend in its employment rate? If so, to what

does the agency attribute this trend and what strategies is the VR agency undertaking to

improve its employment rate?

VR Process: Engagement of Applicants and Eligible Individuals with Disabilities

Resources: Appendix B and Appendix C

• Table 1—VR Agency Profile

• Table 2—Types of Exit

• Table 3— Reasons for Exit

• Table 7—Students with Disabilities

Timely and effective customer service leads to high-quality competitive integrated employment

outcomes for VR program participants. Being engaged with applicants and eligible individuals

with disabilities and assisting them during the eligibility and individualized plan for employment

(IPE) development processes are attributes of positive customer service. SMPID review teams

will look at policies, practices, and trend data, including the most recent program year, to create

an understanding of the engagement and movement of individuals with disabilities through the

VR process. Through the review of relevant policies and data analysis, the VR agency and the

review team can pinpoint potential obstacles to efficient service delivery and engagement of

individuals with disabilities throughout their VR journey. In many instances, such analysis can

help to identify potential reasons for high attrition rates and premature exit at various stages of

the VR process. It is equally valuable to examine data that show positive trends to assess the

effectiveness of VR agency initiatives, practices, or policy changes to improve performance. To

increase the expenditure of funds to serve eligible individuals and participants, VR agencies

must increase the number of applicants and reduce the attrition of individuals at various points in

the VR process.

Questions:

Order of Selection:

4. If the agency is on an order of selection (OOS), what are the reasons and how has the

OOS affected the expenditure of funds? If the VR agency is not on an OOS, is the VR

agency considering implementing an OOS and what are the reasons?

Referral and Application:

5. Has the VR agency experienced rising or falling trends in the total number of referrals or

applicants over the past three program years or even before the COVID-19 pandemic? If

so, what factors or circumstances are contributing to these trends? How do these factors

or circumstances contribute to the expenditure of funds and what strategies is the agency

implementing to address falling trends or to sustain rising trends?

6. Once referred, how quickly are individuals engaged in the application process? What

constitutes an application?

7. Are applicants leaving before eligibility determination? If so, why, and what is the

agency doing to address attrition at application and prior to eligibility?

8. Has the VR agency recently reviewed or revised its policies and procedures pertaining to

referral and application? If so, what were the reasons and results? If not, would doing so

be beneficial and how?

Eligibility:

9. What is the VR agency’s average timeframe for determining eligibility? Has the VR

agency implemented strategies to shorten the determination process? Is the VR agency

experiencing delays in the determination of eligibility of applicants? If so, why, and what

efforts is the VR agency making to monitor and ensure compliance with the 60-day

timeframe?

10. How is the VR agency engaging with individuals during the eligibility determination

process? Is the VR agency using interim eligibility? To what extent is the VR agency

relying on existing documentation or requiring assessments?

11. Is the VR agency complying with the presumption of eligibility requirements for

individuals with disabilities eligible for Social Security?

12. What percentage of individuals are exiting after eligibility but prior to IPE development?

What are the likely factors contributing to this attrition and how is the VR agency

addressing them?

Ineligibility:

13. Is the VR agency providing the required trial work experiences for individuals prior to

determining that an individual is ineligible because the individual is too severely disabled

to benefit from VR services?

14. What other reasons for ineligibility is the VR agency reporting? Is the VR agency

determining an unusually high number and percentage of individuals ineligible?

IPE Development and Participant Status:

15. If the VR agency is experiencing delays in the development of IPEs or is not in

compliance with the 90-day timeframe, what steps is the VR agency taking to ensure

compliance or to address delays? Does the agency have policies or practices that inhibit

the timely development of IPEs?

16. What percentage of individuals are leaving before the development of the IPE and why?

Are participants leaving the VR program after receiving services on the IPE prior to

achieving an employment outcome? Has the VR agency evaluated the reasons for

attrition of participants after receiving services to determine why this is occurring? What

strategies is the agency implementing to decrease this attrition?

17. How is the VR agency ensuring and documenting informed choice in the development of

the IPE, including the selection of the employment goal, the identification of needed

services, and the selection of providers?

Service Record Closure and Exit:

18. Is the VR agency documenting and ensuring that all VR services and supported

employment services identified on the IPE, including post-employment services, that are

necessary for the achievement of the individual’s employment goal have been provided

prior to exit consistent with the individual’s unique strengths, resources, priorities,

concerns, abilities, capabilities, interests, and informed choice?

19. How does the agency ensure that the service records contain the supporting

documentation necessary for closure?

Services and Service Delivery

Resources: Appendix B and Appendix C

• Table 1—VR Agency Profile

• Table 4—VR Service Provision

• Table 5—Measurable Skill Gains and Credentials

• Table 7—Students with Disabilities

• Table 8—Pre-Employment Transition Service Provision

Active engagement and meaningful service provision result in VR program participants

achieving competitive integrated employment. The ongoing engagement of individuals in the

VR process, exercise of informed choice, and the timely provision of quality VR services needed

for VR participants to attain and maximize their employment goals is integral to the success of

the VR program and the participant experience. The scope and type of services provided;

policies related to payments, authorizations, and expenditures; service delivery methods; and

established rates of payment are among the components influencing the use of funds to ensure

successful employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

The information in Table 4 is intended to provide a general overview of the provision of services

and the potential effect on the ability of eligible individuals to achieve quality employment. The

VR services data are categorized into three subcategories: Training Services, Career Services,

and Other Services. Training services may include such services as postsecondary education,

vocational and occupation skills training, on-the-job training, and apprenticeship training. A full

list of training services is provided in Section 134(c)(3)(D) of WIOA. Career services may

include assessments, group or individual counseling, or career planning. A full list of career

services is listed in Section 134(c)(2) of WIOA. Other services would include any other service

provided through the VR program not specified as training or career services in WIOA. These

services include, for example, transportation, maintenance, reader services, or interpreter

services.

Questions:

20. What internal control activities, including policies and procedures, are in place to ensure

individuals with disabilities are provided timely engagement and services throughout the

VR process? Is there a balance between internal controls and service delivery processes?

If VR services are delayed following the development of the IPE, does the VR agency

have policies or practices that may inhibit the available choice or timely delivery of

services?

21. Has the VR agency made any changes in its policies or procedures related to the

provision of VR services and supported employment services (e.g., service delivery

models, implementation of a financial needs test, cost containment measures, use of

comparable services or benefits, expansion or addition of new services, post-employment

services, career advancement, job retention, etc.)?

22. Are there limits on the nature and scope of VR services provided to the individual to

achieve an employment outcome? What is the VR agency’s policy on the provision of

out-of-state services?

23. If the VR agency has financial need and cost participation policies, what effect do these

have on individuals seeking VR services? For participants, how do these policies affect

choice and the services provided on an IPE or the employment goal? Has the VR agency

evaluated the effect of eliminating financial need or cost participation policies?

24. Is the VR agency providing VR services in-house or through vendors/ providers using

fee-for-service arrangements or contracts, or a combination of both? How does the VR

agency monitor or evaluate the effectiveness of VR services as well as consumer

satisfaction with VR services?

25. Are there sufficient vendors/providers to meet service needs? If not, what barriers exist

and what is the agency doing to address capacity? Is the agency providing VR services

in-house that it could contract for to reduce strain on VR program staff resources?

26. Does the VR agency contract with or refer individuals to centers for independent living in

the State for pre-employment transition services or VR services that assist individuals to

obtain competitive integrated employment? If not, why not?

27. Are written policies for rates of payment compliant with 34 C.F.R. § 361.50(c)? How

recently have policies related to rates of payment been reviewed or revised by the VR

agency? Does the VR agency experience any barriers related to setting rates of payment?

Note: Refer to the Financial Management focus area for additional information and

questions related to internal control policies and procedures, contracts, and

methodologies for determining rates of payment.

28. What correlations exist between the services being provided and the achievement of

employment outcomes, both in terms of the quality and quantity of employment

outcomes? Do certain services lead to better outcomes? For participants who exit without

achieving an employment outcome after receiving services what types of services are

being provided to those participants?

29. How does the VR agency consider the national, State, and local labor market information

and future projections, as well as other information, when establishing the employment

goal and career path with the individual and evaluating and planning the training and

educational needs of the individual in the development of the IPE and the provision of

VR services?

30. To what extent is the VR agency providing postsecondary and vocational training leading

to credentials and improved opportunities to maximize quality employment outcomes?

What are the VR agency’s policies on the provision of postsecondary education and

training and are there limitations? How often and under what circumstances does the VR

agency grant exceptions?

Quality of Employment Outcomes

Resources: Appendix B and Appendix C

• Table 1—VR Agency Profile

• Table 2—Types of Exit

• Table 3— Reasons for Exit

• Table 4—VR Service Provision

• Table 5—Measurable Skill Gains and Credentials

• Table 6—Competitive Integrated Employment and Supported Employment Outcomes

The mission of the VR program is to maximize employment opportunities for all individuals

with disabilities, including those with the most significant disabilities, and to assist individuals

with disabilities to achieve economic self-sufficiency. The achievement of quality employment

outcomes requires an investment in quality services and training, including the establishment of

community rehabilitation programs, as needed, and the use of funds to support training programs

and education leading to measurable skill gains and credentials, including advanced degrees. VR

program participants should sustain employment after they exit the VR program and be provided

the opportunity to advance in their careers. To guide the analysis and discussion of quality

employment outcomes, the SMPID team will review a variety of data elements with the VR

agency, including the following:

• Employment status at exit;

• Employment rate;

• Median wages earned;

• Median weekly hours worked;

• Health insurance at exit;

• Social security benefits at exit;

• Individuals who exited with competitive integrated employment, including supported

employment;

• Individuals employed in second quarter after exit and fourth quarter after exit;

• Percentage of individuals who retained employment;

• Types of occupations that VR participants obtain;

• Efforts to promote career advancement;

• The attainment of Measurable Skill Gains (MSG) and credentials;

• Efforts to assist individuals in achieving parity with the general working population; and

• Strategies to promote job retention.

Questions:

Employment Rate:

31. To what does the VR agency attribute to changes in the percentage of competitive

integrated employment outcomes in recent years?

32. Given its employment rate, what strategies has the VR agency developed to improve its

overall performance in assisting individuals with significant and most significant

disabilities to achieve and retain competitive integrated employment or supported

employment, including customized employment? What strategies is the VR agency using

to increase the number and quality of supported employment outcomes?

Quality Indicators:

33. What strategies, policy changes, or practices, including the expanded use of funds to

support quality services, has the VR agency implemented to improve its performance on

the quality indicators for employment outcomes?

34. What strategies has the VR agency engaged in to assist individuals with significant and

most significant disabilities to advance in employment, including apprenticeships and

advanced training in the fields of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics

(STEM), including computer science, medicine, law, or business, in accordance with the

requirements of Section 103(a)(18) of the Rehabilitation Act?

35. Does the VR agency have strategies to assist individuals with disabilities in reducing the

need for public support? Has there been a change in the number of individuals in receipt

of public support (e.g., Supplemental Security Income, Social Security Disability

Insurance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), other sources of support and

medical insurance coverage (e.g., medical assistance) as a result of VR services and

benefits counseling?

36. What strategies does the VR agency employ to promote career advancement, attainment

of MSGs and credentials, and improvement in the quality and quantity of employment

outcomes, including supported employment outcomes?

37. To what extent has the VR agency coordinated with other WIOA partner programs or

other State programs to provide/coordinate services and the expenditure of funds that

benefit VR program participants?

Pre-Employment Transition Services

Resources: Appendix B and Appendix C

• Table 7—Students with Disabilities

• Table 8—Pre-Employment Transition Service Provision

Early career exploration through pre-employment transition services increases the likelihood of

students with disabilities achieving high-quality competitive integrated employment. The review

team will analyze data on the number of students with disabilities, the number of those receiving

pre-employment transition services, and the types of services provided. In addition, SMPID will

provide information related to the breakout of students with disabilities who received

preemployment transitions services as potentially eligible students with disabilities and students

with disabilities who received these services under an IPE, as well as the number of students

with disabilities who advance from potentially eligible status to VR program participant status

and their outcomes. These data may be used to evaluate the relationship between the provision of

pre-employment transition services, participation in the VR process, and employment outcomes.

More specifically, the SMPID review team will explore the use of funds for the provision of

preemployment transition services and whether the agency is meeting the required reservation

and expenditure of at least 15 percent of its Federal VR grant funds.

Questions:

38. Does the VR agency have updated and accurate policies and procedures to implement

pre-employment transition service requirements, including the provision of services to

students with disabilities who are potentially eligible for VR services?

39. How does the VR agency ensure accurate documentation, tracking, and reporting of

preemployment transition services provided to students with disabilities? How are VR

staff tracking and documenting time spent providing required pre-employment transition

services or coordination activities for students with disabilities? Is the agency providing

authorized activities?

40. For agencies that are not meeting or exceeding the reservation and expenditure of 15

percent of Title I VR funds for arranging and providing pre-employment transition

services to students with disabilities, what are the reasons or explanations provided by the

agency for not meeting this requirement? What strategies are being implemented to meet

the requirement?

41. Of those receiving one or more pre-employment transition services, what percentage of

students with disabilities are potentially eligible and what percentage are applicants for

the VR program? How many students with disabilities are exiting pre-employment

transition services without applying for further VR services? What strategies is the VR

agency using to attract, engage, and encourage potentially eligible students with

disabilities to consider applying for the VR program?

42. Of reported students with disabilities who are not receiving pre-employment transition

services, what strategies is the VR agency using to increase the number of reported

students receiving pre-employment transition services?

43. If the number of students with disabilities receiving pre-employment transition services is

increasing, what is preventing the VR agency from meeting the reserve requirement?

44. How are pre-employment transition services provided and what challenges exist? Are

there differences in the service modalities, level, or availability of pre-employment

transition services in different parts of the State (e.g., unavailable CRPs in rural areas of

the State, level of local educational agency coordination or cooperation)? What strategies

is the VR agency employing to address any deficits?

45. For students with IPEs who receive pre-employment transition services as well as VR

services necessary to support their participation in pre-employment transition services,

what VR services are these students with disabilities receiving that may be charged to the

reserved funds?

46. How does the VR agency engage with partners and education programs to collaboratively

provide pre-employment transition services, including planning activities, joint activities,

and coordination activities such as Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings?

What challenges, if any, is the VR agency experiencing in collaborating with education

programs and other partners to provide pre-employment transition coordination

activities?

C. RSA-911 Data Reporting, Internal Controls, and Quality Assurance

Resources: Policies and procedures related to internal controls necessary for the verification of

RSA-911 data and quality assurance.

While not the sole basis for VR program management, the analysis of data can play a significant

role in decision-making and strategies that drive improvement in performance and the use of

resources and funding. The more accurate and valid the data, the better the data-informed

decisions will be. Quality assurance (QA) is a proactive process to ensure agency staff will

deliver, and individuals with disabilities will receive, high-quality VR services. QA determines

whether specific requirements are being met and improves work processes and efficiency by

analyzing and monitoring performance, developing and implementing strategies to detect and

correct deficits, and tracking performance metrics. Together, data-informed decisions and quality

assurance lead to improved agency management of resources and outcomes for individuals with

disabilities.

The SMPID Team will assess whether the agency is adhering to the internal control requirements

in 2 C.F.R. § 200.303. Internal controls means a process, implemented by a non-Federal entity,

designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the

effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of reporting for internal and external use,

and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Internal controls are established and

implemented as a measure of checks and balances to ensure proper expenditures of funds.

Internal controls serve to safeguard assets and prevent fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement.

They include methods and procedures the grantee uses to manage the day-to-day operations of

grant-supported activities to assure compliance with applicable Federal requirements and that

performance goals are being achieved. SMPID will review the VR agency’s current control

activities (policies and procedures), communication, and monitoring of internal controls and

quality assurance designed to mitigate potential risks in achieving management and performance

goals.

The VR agency is required to maintain verifying documentation in an individual’s service

record, particularly regarding eligibility determination, IPE development, services provided, and

case closure. The VR agency must also comply with the data validation requirements outlined in

joint WIOA policy guidance (RSA TAC-19-01). The use of an electronic case management

system does not remove the requirement for the agency to maintain either hard copies or scanned

copies of required supporting documentation in the individual’s service record. SMPID staff will

review VR agency internal controls to ensure accuracy of data reported in the RSA-911.

Accurate reporting of data is paramount in making data-driven decisions in the management and

operation of the VR program leading to continuous improvement in program and fiscal

performance.

Questions:

47. In addition to case reviews, how does the VR agency’s system of internal controls ensure

that RSA-911 data are reported accurately and valid?

48. What technical assistance, if any, does the VR agency need on the requirements for

developing and implementing improved internal controls to ensure that data reported are

accurate and valid?

49. What training and technical assistance does the VR agency need on the type of source

documentation required to validate the data reported through the RSA-911? Describe the

VR agency’s policies and procedures that implement RSA TAC 19-01: Guidance for

Validating Jointly Required Performance Data Submitted under WIOA.

50. Describe how the VR agency adjusts its RSA-911 reporting based on errors it is receiving

through RSA’s quarterly edit checks. How does the VR agency ensure future reporting

errors are avoided based upon past errors generated by the edit checks?

51. How does the VR agency use data to inform and improve program performance and

fiscal management?

52. How does the VR agency communicate and ensure that VR counselors and staff

understand and consistently apply policies and procedures related to RSA-911 data

collection and reporting?

53. What degree of autonomy do VR counselors have in authorizing services and what

internal control activities are in place?

54. How does the VR agency ensure accurate reporting of MSG and credential attainment?

How does the VR agency identify, capture, and document MSG and credential attainment

in case service records? How is this data verified? Do service records have supporting

documentation?

55. Is the VR agency a signatory to the State Wage Interchange System (SWIS) Agreement?

If the VR agency has not signed the SWIS Agreement what separate interstate wage

sharing agreements has the VR agency executed with other States to satisfy the

requirement that States use interstate wage records in measuring a State's performance on

the WIOA primary indicators of performance?

56. To what extent does the VR agency participate in other data sharing agreements? For

example, does the VR agency have existing agreements with secondary or postsecondary

institutions for the purpose of obtaining information regarding enrollment, measurable

skill gains, or credential attainment; or State workforce partners for the purpose of

determining co-enrollment in other workforce programs?

D. Technical Assistance

The following questions are designed to assess the quality of the technical assistance provided by

RSA and RSA-funded technical assistance centers, as well as to identify the ongoing technical

assistance needs of the VR agency. During the preliminary meetings with the VR agency in

preparation for the on-site monitoring or off-site review, the VR agency is encouraged to identify

specific technical assistance needs to achieve continuous improvement in performance, which

SMPID can address during its on-site or off-site meetings, or which can be referred to the RSA

technical assistance centers.

57. What technical assistance needs does the VR agency have on any issue or topic related to

the performance focus area?

58. Has the VR agency received technical assistance from RSA staff on any issue or topic

related to this focus area? If so, please describe the nature of the technical assistance

provided and the need for any additional technical assistance.

59. Has the VR agency received technical assistance from one or more of the RSA-funded

technical assistance centers on a topic or issue related to this focus area? If so, from

which center? Was the technical assistance universal, targeted, or intensive? Please

describe the technical assistance received. What were the objectives and results?

IV. Focus Area—Financial Management of the State Vocational

Rehabilitation Services and State Supported Employment

Services Programs

A. Nature and Scope

The effective and efficient fiscal administration of the VR and Supported Employment programs

is essential to the ability of a VR agency to maximize the funds available for attainment of

employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities. SMPID will review components of the

grantee’s financial management system and assess the fiscal accountability of the programs to—

• Ensure funds are expended within the period of performance and are used only for

allowable purposes;

• Ensure programs have sound internal controls and reliable reporting systems;

• Identify needed improvements in fiscal policy, processes, and procedures to ensure the

maximum use of funds to benefit VR participants and students with disabilities; and,

• Ensure a relative benefit to the VR system is proportional to the funds expended (e.g.,

contracts, one-stops, indirect cost rates, cost allocation plans, etc.).

Internal controls means a process, implemented by the grantee, designed to provide reasonable

assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the effectiveness and efficiency of

operations, reliability of reporting for internal and external use, and compliance with applicable

laws and regulations. Internal controls serve to safeguard assets and prevent fraud, waste, abuse,

improper payments, and mismanagement. They include methods and procedures the grantee uses

to manage the day-to-day operations of grant-supported activities to assure compliance with

applicable Federal requirements and that performance goals are being achieved. The VR

agency’s internal controls for ensuring compliance with fiscal requirements will be a core

component of the financial management system review, particularly as they relate to the VR

agency’s use of Federal funds, including the required reservation of funds for pre-employment

transition services, and the requirements for non-Federal match.

The Federal fiscal requirements referenced during the review include—

• Rehabilitation Act and VR and Supported Employment program implementing

regulations in 34 C.F.R. part 361 and 34 C.F.R. part 363, respectively;

• Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for

Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) located in 2 C.F.R. Part 200;

• Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 C.F.R. part

76;

• Departmental and RSA guidance, including Policy Directives (PD), Technical Assistance

Circulars (TAC), Grant Bulletins, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), etc.; and

• Grant Award terms and conditions.

The review team will use a variety of resources and documents from the current FFY and three

FFYs prior. If the issues identified include FFYs beyond the three prior FFYs, SMPID may

request additional information as needed. Resources and documentation to be reviewed include

data submitted by the VR agency (e.g., Federal Financial Reports (SF-425), VR Financial

Reports (RSA-17), and the VR services portion of the Unified or Combined State Plan) and in

the Department’s Grants Management System (G5).

The SMPID review team will review the following documents, as applicable, to ensure

adherence to accountability requirements, and may request additional information, if needed:

• Single Audit findings and corrective actions;

• State/agency allocation/budget documents and fiscal reports;

• Agency policies, procedures, and forms (e.g., monitoring, procurement, etc.);

• Documentation of obligations and expenditures, including contracts, purchase orders,

invoices, etc.; and

• Grant award notifications, documentation of non-Federal share/match (e.g., interagency

transfers, third-party cooperative arrangements (TPCAs), establishment and construction

projects, private donations), maintenance of effort (MOE), and program income

documentation.

The SMPID review team will work collaboratively with the VR agency to obtain the

documentation necessary to complete the review (see Appendix B), while minimizing the

amount of documentation requested to the extent possible.

The degree to which the review team addresses each fiscal requirement is dependent upon the

individual circumstances of the agency. The review team will analyze the information obtained

prior to on-site monitoring or off-site review activities by reviewing the documentation

submitted, conducting teleconferences or virtual meetings, and examining reported data to

determine the level of review required for each component. Throughout the review activities, the

review team will focus on the use of funds and identification of strategies to assist VR agencies

in minimizing the return of funds for reallotment and/or the return of unused funds at the end of

the period of performance for the award. Therefore, the scope of this focus area is limited

primarily to areas which address the financial management and operations that impact the use of

or return of Federal funds.

B. Period of Performance—VR program

Period of performance is the time during which the non-Federal entity (grantee) may incur new

obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award (2 C.F.R. § 200.1). For

purposes of the Department’s Grant Award Notifications (GAN), the period of performance is

referred to as the Federal Funding Period.

To accurately account for Federal and non-Federal funds, the VR agency must ensure that

allowable non-Federal and Federal obligations and expenditures are assigned to the correct FFY

award. SMPID uses the financial information reported by the grantee to determine each VR

agency’s compliance with fiscal requirements (e.g., reservation of funds, matching, MOE, etc.).

Therefore, if the grantee is not assigning obligations and expenditures to the correct FFY, in

accordance with the period of performance requirements, RSA is unable to determine, with

certainty, the grantee’s compliance with these Federal requirements.

Because issues identified in this area significantly affect other areas of the fiscal review, if

substantive issues related to period of performance are identified, this area will become a

primary focus area for the fiscal review.

Questions:

1. Identify the State’s requirements for determining when funds are considered obligated.

2. Identify the VR agency’s internal control processes for tracking and reporting non-Federal

and Federal obligations and expenditures to the correct FFY award. This includes a review of

the fiscal data elements used by the VR agency to ensure tracking and alignment of

obligations and expenditures to the correct FFY award. Specific areas for review include, but

are not limited to—

• Authorizations for consumer services;

• Administrative costs (e.g., rent, utilities, personnel salaries, travel); and

• Contracts (short-term and long-term).

3. Identify how the agency ensures obligations are liquidated within the period of performance

or subsequent 120-day liquidation period.

4. Describe the agency’s internal control processes for calculating and ensuring the accuracy of

financial data, including the Federal and non-Federal share of obligations and expenditures,

reported on the SF-425/RSA-17.

5. Describe the agency’s processes for ensuring that adjustments (e.g., journal entries, rebates,

refunds, etc.) are applied to the correct FFY.

6. How can these internal controls be improved?

C. Match (non-Federal share)—VR and Supported Employment Programs

VR Program

This area assesses the matching requirements for the VR program. It includes an assessment of

whether the matching level was met, as well as whether the sources of match were consistent

with Federal requirements. Because match is the basis for determining a State’s compliance with

the VR program MOE requirements (34 C.F.R. § 361.62(a)), review of this area may include

MOE when issues are identified.

VR program implementing regulations require that the State must incur a portion of expenditures

under the VR services portion of the Unified or Combined State Plan from non-Federal funds to

meet its cost sharing requirements (34 C.F.R. § 361.60). The required Federal share for

expenditures made by the State, including expenditures for the provision of VR services and the

administration of the VR services portion of the Unified or Combined State Plan, is 78.7 percent.

The State’s share is 21.3 percent.

RSA staff will address requirements pertaining to the sources of non-Federal share used by the

State as the match for the VR program including, but not limited to:

• State appropriations and interagency transfers;

• TPCAs;

• Establishment projects; and

• Randolph-Sheppard set aside expenditures.

Prior to the review, SMPID will ask the VR agency to identify the sources and amounts of match

contributed by the VR agency, by FFY, for the period under review. Additionally, SMPID will

request the agency’s internal control processes for ensuring that only allowable expenditures are

reported as the match.

State Appropriations and Interagency Transfers

Resources: SF-425/RSA-17 financial reports and agency documentation of non-Federal

expenditures (e.g., general ledger, accounting records)

Match from State appropriations include obligations and expenditures from funds appropriated

by the State to the DSA or designated State unit (DSU) to pay the State’s share of program

expenditures. This source may include State expenditures made on behalf of the program from a

central account or other State department. For example, a State pays for personnel fringe benefits

and indirect costs from a central pool of State funds. The actual State expenditures from this pool

for VR staff providing allowable VR services would be treated as State appropriated funds.

This area includes non-Federal funds transferred to or otherwise under the control of the VR

agency, so long as the VR agency maintains control over the determination of eligibility, the

provision of services, and the allocation and expenditure of the funds.

Questions:

7. What are the sources and amounts of State appropriations reported as match by the VR

agency, by FFY, for the period under review?

8. What are the agency’s internal control processes for ensuring that only allowable

expenditures are reported as the match? How can these internal controls be improved?

Third-Party Cooperative Arrangements (TPCAs)

Resources: Documentation related to TPCAs (e.g., contracts, agreements, and invoices)

TPCAs are agreements between the VR agency and other State or local public agencies (referred

to as cooperating agencies). TPCAs allow the VR agency to use a third party to provide VR

services to applicants for, or recipients of services from, the VR program. Services are typically

provided by cooperating agency staff and may not be provided by VR counselors or other VR

agency staff. The review of TPCAs includes those for the provision of pre-employment

transition services.

The SMPID review team will assess consistency of TPCAs with the requirements of 34 C.F.R. §

361.28. This includes the agency’s process for ensuring that TPCA costs are allocable to the VR

program in accordance with the relative benefits received (2 C.F.R. § 200.405).

Establishment Projects

Resources: Policies related to establishment projects and establishment project contracts or

agreements; comprehensive statewide needs assessment; VR services portion of the Unified or

Combined State Plan; and SF-425/RSA-17 financial reports

This area assesses fiscal accountability for VR funds used for the establishment, development, or

improvement of a public or nonprofit CRP to provide VR services to applicants and eligible

individuals of the VR program that promote integration into the community and competitive

integrated employment, including supported employment and customized employment (Section

103(b)(2) of the Rehabilitation Act and 34 C.F.R. § 361.49(a)(1)). The VR agency must evaluate

the needs of VR participants in the comprehensive Statewide needs assessment (CSNA) (34

C.F.R. § 361.29) to determine whether the VR agency can establish, develop, or improve a

public or non-profit CRP (34 C.F.R. § 361.5(c)(16) and (17), and 34 C.F.R. § 361.49(a)(1)). The

need to establish, develop, or improve a CRP, along with goals and priorities and strategies to

address the need, must be reported in the VR services portion of the Unified or Combined State

Plan.

The questions below address the pre-planning requirements, as well as the use of non-Federal

funds earmarked for establishment projects (34 C.F.R. § 361.60(b)(3)(i)).

Questions:

9. Identify any contracts or agreements the agency has regarding the establishment,

development, or improvement of a public or nonprofit CRP. For these agreements, specify—

• Where the CSNA incorporates the need to establish, develop, or improve a public or

nonprofit CRP;

• The goals and priorities and strategies related to each establishment project;

• How the agency determined the amount of funds to be contributed toward the project,

including the source of the non-Federal funds (e.g., VR agency State appropriation, CRP

non-Federal funds);

• How the agency and CRP will ensure that only allowable applicants or recipients of VR

services receive VR services from the establishment project; and

• The process the agency used to ensure that all pertinent Federal requirements were

addressed, such as the requirement that the Federal share of the cost of construction for

the facilities for a FFY will not exceed an amount equal to 10 percent of the State’s

allotment under Section 110 for such year (Section 101(a)(17)(A) of the Rehabilitation

Act) and that the Federal share for expenditures made for the construction of a facility for

CRP purposes may not be more than 50 percent of the total cost of the project (34 C.F.R.

§ 361.60(a)(2)).

Randolph Sheppard Set Aside

Resources: Agency documentation of set-aside expenditures, Report of Vending Facility

Program (RSA-15)

VR agencies serving as the State licensing agency are authorized by the Randolph-Sheppard Act

to set aside funds for the purposes set forth in the statute. Such expenditures, in certain

categories, are considered as non-Federal expenditures in support of the Federal VR program.

Therefore, these expenditures must also be reported as non-Federal expenditures on the VR

agency’s financial reports for purposes of determining match and MOE—

• Acquisition of new and replacement equipment;

• Maintenance and repair of equipment; and

• Management Services and Supervision.

Questions:

10. Identify how the agency tracks obligations and expenditures from set-aside funds.

11. Identify the agency’s internal control processes for ensuring that only allowable non-Federal

expenditures, including set-aside expenditures, are reported as match. How can these internal

controls be improved?

Supported Employment Program

Resources: Federal Financial Reports and agency documentation of non-Federal expenditures

This area assesses the matching requirements for the Supported Employment program. It

includes an assessment of whether the matching level was met, as well as whether the sources of

the match were consistent with Federal requirements. Supported Employment program

regulations require that the State expend 50 percent of its total Supported Employment allotment

for the provision of supported employment services, including extended services, to youth with

the most significant disabilities. This means the amount of Federal funds spent on allowable

services for non-youth with the most significant disabilities may not exceed the amount of

Federal funds matched and spent on youth with the most significant disabilities. The Supported

Employment funds required to be reserved and expended for services to youth with the most

significant disabilities are awarded through the SE-B grant award. The Federal share for

expenditures from the State’s SE-B grant award is 90 percent. The statutorily required 10 percent

match requirement applies to the costs of carrying out the provision of supported employment

services, including extended services, to youth with the most significant disabilities. This means

that the 10 percent is applied to total expenditures, including both the Federal and non-Federal

shares, incurred for this purpose, and that the non-Federal share must also be spent on the

provision of supported employment services, including extended services, to youth with the most

significant disabilities.

Questions:

12. For the SE-B award, identify the sources and amounts of match reported by the VR agency,

by FFY, for the period under review.

13. Describe the agency’s internal control processes for ensuring that only allowable

expenditures are reported as the match. In particular, how does the agency ensure that only

expenditures for the provision of supported employment services, including extended

services, to youth with the most significant disabilities are counted as the match? How can

these internal controls be improved?

D. Vendor Contracts

Resources: Policies and procedures regarding contracting, including determining the rates of the

payment, and contract monitoring

This area addresses the requirements related to contracting for purchased services. Uniform

Guidance requires that States follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements

from its non-Federal funds (2 C.F.R. § 200.317). Contract policies are necessary to ensure that

contract language results in the VR agency receiving the necessary data that it must collect and

report with the frequency required by the terms and conditions of the VR award (2 C.F.R. §

200.328). In addition, VR agencies are responsible for oversight of the operations of the Federal

award supported activities. The non-Federal entity must monitor its activities under Federal

awards, including contracts, to assure compliance with applicable Federal requirements and

performance expectations are being achieved (2 C.F.R. § 200.329(a)). Through the use of

contracts, VR agencies must relate financial data and accomplishments to performance goals and

objectives of the Federal award, consistent with the reporting of data on the SF-425, RSA-17,

and RSA-911 reports (2 C.F.R. § 200.329(b)). VR agencies are required to develop and maintain

written policies governing rates of payment for all purchased VR services (34 C.F.R.

§ 361.50(c)). These policies outline the process the VR agency completes to ensure the rates of

payment for VR services are allowable, reasonable, and allocable to the award, in accordance

with Uniform Guidance Cost Principles (2 C.F.R. §§ 200.403, 200.404, and 200.405).

Two areas related to vendor contracts will be reviewed—

• Contract development/implementation (e.g., ensuring required language, determining

rates of payment, invoice processing, budget management, etc.); and

• Contract monitoring.

This review area includes contracts for the provision of pre-employment transition services.

Questions:

14. Identify the agency’s internal control processes related to contract development and

implementation (e.g., ensuring contracts contain required language, determining rates of

payment or fees for services and ensuring that contract payments are reasonable, etc.).

15. Identify the agency’s internal control processes for ensuring sufficient supporting

documentation to determine the payment requested was for allowable VR services and was

consistent with the provisions of the contract.

16. Identify the agency’s contract monitoring processes and the outcomes of contract monitoring.

17. How can these internal controls be improved?

E. Technical Assistance

The following questions are designed to assess the quality of the technical assistance provided by

RSA and the OSEP and RSA-funded technical assistance centers, as well as to identify the

ongoing technical assistance needs of the VR agency.

18. What technical assistance needs does the VR agency have on any issue or topic related to this

focus area?

19. Has the VR agency received technical assistance from RSA staff on any issue or topic related

to this focus area? If so, please describe the nature of the technical assistance provided.

20. Has the VR agency received technical assistance from one or more of the RSA-funded

technical assistance centers on a topic or issue related to this focus area? If so, from which

center? Was the technical assistance universal, targeted, or intensive? Please describe the

technical assistance received. What were the objectives/results?

21. Did the technical assistance provided by SMPID and RSA-funded centers aid the VR agency

in correcting or improving its management of the VR program and delivery of services to

individuals with disabilities?

APPENDIX A

Vocational Rehabilitation Program Accountability Model

I. Background

To monitor the VR program in a manner consistent with Section 107 of the Rehabilitation Act

and the Department’s policies, and to address technical assistance needs of VR agencies, SMPID

developed an accountability model to enable it to carry out monitoring activities while increasing

the effective use of its resources to administer the VR program. The model is consistent with

guidelines set forth in the Department’s Directive titled “Guide for Managing Formula Grant

Programs,” dated August 13, 2019.

II. Accountability Model

The accountability model is comprised of three fiscal factors and one programmatic factor for a

total of four performance indicators, as follows:

• Percentage of the total VR grant appropriation the State’s VR allotment represents;

• Percentage of State’s Federal VR allotment expended during year of appropriation;

• Percentage of State’s Federal VR allotment expended during the period of performance;

and

• VR program participant percentage change from the prior two Program Years.

RSA computes all data on a State basis to align the RSA accountability model with the principles

in Title I of WIOA, under which core partners in the workforce development system, including

VR agencies, establish levels of performance statewide and report performance results on the

Annual Statewide Performance Report (WIOA Annual Report) at the State level. This method

also ensures comparability between States with one VR agency (combined) and States with more

than one VR agency (general and blind). In making the calculations, SMPID reviewed data

reported on RSA collection instruments, including the RSA-911 and the VR Financial Reports

(RSA-17) for the most recent period for which complete data are available. Therefore, the data

used in the calculation of the factors comprising the model are consistent and verifiable.

Importantly, the data elements used in the calculation of the factors are not subjective in nature,

further reducing the likelihood of errors.

III. Description of Factors

The four factors analyzed through the model are described more fully below, including the basis

for their use, the methods of calculation, and threshold levels of performance equating with

numerical scores.

1. Percentage of the total VR grant appropriation the State’s allotment.

Basis: Use of this factor is consistent with the guidelines contained in the Guide for

Managing Formula Grants (ODS: 1-102) issued by the Department on August 13, 2019.

States allotted a greater amount of the total Federal formula award potentially have more

financial resources available to assist a larger number of individuals with disabilities to

achieve employment. Consequently, these States can have a more significant effect on VR

program performance nationally.

Method of Calculation: This calculation is based on the percentage of the total VR allotment

the State’s formula award allotment represents. The State’s formula allotments are not

adjusted to account for reallotment, maintenance of effort reductions, or other changes to the

allotment.

Scoring Thresholds: Assign numerical scores based on the table below. 1 represents the

lowest risk; 5 represents the highest risk.

Formula Grant

Award Percentage

Risk Score

0.000% - 0.749%

0.750% - 1.490%

1.500% - 2.249%

2.250% - 3.990%

4.000% - 8.800%

2. Percentage of State’s VR allotment expended by end of year of appropriation.

Basis: Fiscal trend data indicates a decreasing amount of Federal VR funds are expended

during the year of appropriation for VR awards. This trend increases the risk of unused VR

funds and that VR program objectives will not be attained.

Method of Calculation: RSA-17 for the reporting period ending September 30, line 12,

Federal Cash Disbursements divided by line 10, Total Federal Funds Awarded.

Scoring Thresholds: Numerical scores assigned based on the table below. 1 represents the

lowest risk; 5 represents the highest risk.

Low

Threshold

High

Threshold

Risk

Score

64.000%

100.000%

48.000%

63.990%

32.000%

47.990%

16.000%

31.990%

0.000%

15.990%

3. Percentage of State’s Federal VR allotment expended during the period of

performance.

Basis: Fiscal trend data indicates an increasing amount of Federal VR funds remaining

unexpended at the end of the period of performance for VR awards. These funds represent

resources that were not made available to VR consumers to accomplish VR program

outcomes.

Method of Calculation: State’s VR formula award amount divided by the net amount of

Federal VR award funds drawn down according to G5.

Scoring Thresholds:

Low

Threshold

High

Threshold

Risk

Score

100.00%

140.000%

90.00%

99.999%

80.00%

89.999%

70.00%

79.999%

0.00%

69.999%

4. VR Program participant percentage change from the prior two Program Years.

Basis: VR program participants are individuals with disabilities, who were determined

eligible and received VR services under an individualized plan for employment. VR

program participants inform the WIOA performance accountability system, and their

outcomes are assessed across the performance indicators, as applicable. Program

participation change reflects the extent to which State programs are either contracting or

expanding. States with contracting VR programs represent a higher risk than States with

expanding VR programs because, in States with contractions, fewer individuals with

disabilities are receiving VR services and achieving competitive integrated employment

through the VR program.

Method of Calculation: The difference between State’s number of VR participants served

in the two prior Program Years divided by the number of VR program participants served

two Program Years prior, multiplied by 100.

Scoring Thresholds: Numerical scores assigned based on the table below. 1 represents the

lowest risk; 5 represents the highest risk.

Low

Threshold

High

Threshold

Risk

Score

6.1%

44.8%

1.9%

5.7%

-0.5%

1.5%

-0.6%

-3.6%

-5.1%

-21.2%

IV. Method to Determine Level of Monitoring

SMPID performs the described calculations for each State, resulting in a State’s overall score.

SMPID selects States for review in a manner that ensures selected VR agencies in States with

higher scores and most in need of technical assistance will be scheduled for on-site monitoring

or off-site review. SMPID adds the State scores for each of the factors and divides by 5 to

calculate an average State program accountability score ranging from 1.00 to 5.00.

On-Site Monitoring and Off-Site Reviews

SMPID will conduct comprehensive on-site monitoring, or off-site reviews when travel is not

possible, of a select number of VR agencies with higher accountability scores to review the

programmatic and fiscal performance of the VR and Supported Employment programs.

Scope: This monitoring will entail implementation of all areas of programmatic performance and

fiscal review contained in Sections III and IV of this MTAG.

Monitoring Team and Activities: The monitoring team, consisting of at least two program

members and one fiscal member, will review documentation and conduct teleconferences related

to all focus areas in preparation for an on-site visit, typically lasting for one week (or off-site

review activities when travel is not possible).

Additionally, on-site monitoring and off-site reviews will involve the identification of strategies

designed to improve program and fiscal performance related to the use and expenditure of funds

to maximize employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

APPENDIX B

Vocational Rehabilitation Agency Required Documentation

The review team will use documentation provided by the VR agency to inform the development

of the on-site or off-site agenda and in the review of each focus area. In accordance with 2 C.F.R.

§ 200.337(a), records of non-Federal entities, the “Federal awarding agency, Inspectors General,

the Comptroller General of the United States, and the pass-through entity, or any of their

authorized representatives, must have the right of access to any documents, papers, or other

records of the non-Federal entity which are pertinent to the Federal award, in order to make

audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcripts. The right also includes timely and reasonable

access to the non-Federal entity’s personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion related

to such documents.” In accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 81.34(b)(3), “a statement that the recipient

failed to maintain records required by law or failed to allow an authorized representative of the

Secretary access to those records constitutes a prima facie case for the recovery of the funds

affected.”

VR agencies are responsible for submitting the requested documentation within 30 calendar days

of the request unless the review team approves an extension based upon extenuating

circumstances. When submitting requested documentation, please remember the following:

1. Do not include personally identifiable information (e.g., names, Social Security numbers,

dates of birth, etc.);

2. Send copies of signed, executed documents for the last completed Federal fiscal year;

3. “Contract,” as used in this list, means an agreement or promise with another entity to

provide goods or services in exchange for VR or Supported Employment funds. These

agreements may be referred to as memoranda of understanding, memoranda of

agreement, letters of understanding, letters of agreement, grants, agreements, contracts,

purchase orders, or service authorizations;

4. If a particular request is not applicable to the VR agency, or if the information is not

otherwise available, include a statement letting the review team know;

5. If the data being submitted contains State or agency specific codes or titles, please

include a reference sheet that provides an explanation or the code or title to facilitate

review;

6. Submit the requested information as soon as it is available. It is not necessary to submit

all the documentation at one time. Submitting the information to the review team as soon

as possible helps ensure there is adequate time to review the documentation prior to the

on-site or off-site review;

7. Provide fiscal data by Federal fiscal year, not State fiscal year or program year; and

8. Label each document submitted with the corresponding number used in the Document

Request.

After the initial information has been submitted, the RSA Financial Management Specialist may

need to request additional supporting fiscal documents or clarifying information related to the

document submission categories in order to complete the review process. Prior to the review, the

team’s Financial Management Specialist will work with the VR agency to determine the number

of documentation samples being requested and the timeframe from which the samples should be

taken (e.g., contracts, third-party cooperative arrangements, etc.).

Note: Many agencies have established collaboration websites where SMPID review team

members can access and download the requested documentation. Please coordinate with the

review team if this is an approach your agency may wish to use. The Department does not

currently have the capability to provide this service.

PRE-MONITORING DOCUMENT REQUEST

III. Performance of the State VR and Supported Employment Programs

Date

Submitted

1. Written policies and procedures regarding RSA-911 internal control process

(e.g., ensuring data accuracy, reliability, and timely submission).

2. Written policies and procedures regarding the provision and scope of services,

which include the following:

• Referrals and applications (34 C.F.R. § 361.41);

• Eligibility and ineligibility determinations (34 C.F.R. §§ 361.42, 361.43

and 361.44);

• Individualized plan for employment (34 C.F.R. §§ 361.45 and 361.46)

• Record of services (34 C.F.R. § 361.47);

• Scope of vocational rehabilitation services for individuals with

disabilities (34 C.F.R. § 361.48);

• Scope of vocational rehabilitation services for groups of individuals with

disabilities (34 C.F.R. § 361.49);

• Written policies governing the provision of services for individuals with

disabilities (34 C.F.R. § 361.50);

• Informed choice (34 C.F.R. § 361.52);

• Comparable services and benefits (34 C.F.R. § 361.53);

• Participation of individuals in cost of services based on financial need

(34 C.F.R. § 361.54);

• Semi-annual and annual review of individuals in extended employment

and other employment under special certificate provisions of the Fair

Labor Standards Act (34 C.F.R. § 361.55); and

• Requirements for closing the record of services of an individual who has

achieved an employment outcome (34 C.F.R. § 361.56).

3. Written policies and procedures for the provision, scope, tracking and reporting

of supported employment services, including extended services for youth (34

C.F.R. § 361.5(c)(54) and part 363).

4. Written policies and procedures for the provision, tracking, and reporting of pre-

employment transition services (34 C.F.R. § 361.48(a)).

5. A copy of the most recently completed Comprehensive Statewide Needs

Assessment (optional unless VR agency spent Federal or non-Federal funds on

Construction/Establishment projects).

6. As applicable, State-imposed requirements: The designated State unit must,

upon request, identify those regulations and policies relating to the

administration or operation of its vocational rehabilitation program that are

State-imposed, including any regulations or policy based on State interpretation

of any Federal law, regulation, or guideline (34 C.F.R. § 361.39).

IV. Financial Management of the State VR and Supported Employment Programs

1. Period of Performance (2 C.F.R. §§ 200.1 and 200.303; 34 C.F.R. § 76.707):

Date

Submitted

A. Documentation that identifies the State and VR agency financial obligation

requirements and how they are implemented consistent with the Federal

requirements. VR agency’s written policies and procedures that detail the

processes/internal controls for assignment of non-Federal and Federal

financial obligations and expenditures—for authorizations/purchase orders,

contracts, personal salaries, rent, utilities, etc.—to the correct period of

performance specific to Federal awards and non-Federal fund sources;

B. Description of accounting processes, including chart of accounts, used to

track financial obligations and expenditures assigned, tracked, and reported

to a Federal award or non-Federal sources; and

C. VR agency supporting documentation that demonstrates how the process for

assigning, tracking, liquidating, and reporting of obligations and

expenditures (see 1.A. and 1.B. above) meet the period of performance

requirements.

2. Federal Financial Reporting (2 C.F.R. § 200.328):

Date

Submitted

A. VR agency policies and procedures for ensuring the accurate and timely

submission of Federal financial reports (SF-425) and VR financial reports

(RSA-17); and

B. VR agency supporting documentation for SF-425/RSA-17 data submitted

(RSA Financial Management Specialist will provide reporting period end

dates).

3. Match in VR Program (34 C.F.R. § 361.60(a)(1) and (b)):

For the FFYs under review, provide dollar amounts ($) for the following

sources of non-Federal share (match), for each program per FFY.

Date

Submitted

A. State appropriations;

B. Interagency transfers;

C. Third-party cooperative arrangements (VR program only);

D. Randolph-Sheppard program expenditures (VR program only);

E. Construction/Establishment expenditures not included in State

appropriations (VR program only);

F. Cash contributions by private entities; and

G. Other (please describe).

3.1 Third-Party Cooperative Arrangements (TPCA) (if applicable) (34 C.F.R. §

361.28):

Date Submitted

A. VR agency policies and procedures regarding TPCAs, including for the

provision of pre-employment transition services;

B. TPCA contracts/agreements; and

C. VR agency supporting documentation for costs paid under TPCAs (e.g.,

cooperating agency personnel activity reports/work logs, monthly

progress reports, invoices, etc., including respective charges to Federal

and non- Federal share).

3.2 Establishment Projects (VR program only) (if applicable) (Section

03(b)(2)(A) of the Rehabilitation Act and 34 C.F.R. § 361.49(a)(1)):

Date Submitted

A. VR agency policies and procedures regarding establishment projects,

including pre-planning;

B. Requirements, demonstration of the need for establishment and reflection

of goals and priorities in the VR services portion of the Unified or

Combined State plan;

C. Contracts/agreements; and

D. VR agency supporting documentation for expenditures (e.g., progress

reports, invoices, etc.).

3.3 Randolph-Sheppard Expenditures (if applicable) (34 C.F.R. § 361.49(a)):

Date Submitted

A. Policies and procedures regarding the VR agency’s use of Randolph

Sheppard set-aside funds as match in the VR program;

B. VR agency supporting documentation that demonstrates only allowable

set aside fund expenditures are counted as match for the VR program

(DSU management services and supervision, new or replacement

equipment, maintenance and repair of equipment); and

C. VR agency supporting documentation of non-Federal funds, not set-aside,

expended by DSU for acquisition of vending facilities or equipment;

management and supervision; maintenance and repair of equipment;

initial stocks and supplies not to exceed six months; and initial operating

expenses not to exceed six months.

4. Match in the Supported Employment Program – documentation of non-

Federal share being spent in Supported Employment-B for youth with the

most significant disabilities.

Date Submitted

A. Supporting documentation that costs used for match met the age

requirements for youth and that youth are working in a supported

employment position.

5. Samples of Vendor Contracts and Agreements

For each sample provided, when applicable, include the: announcement, requests for

proposal/bid, original contract, amendments, invoices, payment approval, monthly and quarterly

reports, verification of performance, corrective actions, final output, and reconciliation. Contact

your RSA review team fiscal representative to identify what contract sample sets to send.

A. Procurement policies and procedures used by the State in procuring VR and Supported

Employment goods or services, including requirements for requests for proposal, etc.

B. Contracts used to purchase VR services, including pre-employment transition services

(purchased services).

C. Policies and procedures regarding contract monitoring.

D. Samples of completed contract monitoring from the sample set of contracts provided.

APPENDIX C

Vocational Rehabilitation Services and Supported Employment Program’s

Performance Tables

Table 1—[AGENCY] Performance Profile

Table 2—[AGENCY] Types of Exit

Table 3—[AGENCY] Reasons for Exit

Table 4—[AGENCY] VR Service Provision

Table 5—[AGENCY] Measurable Skill Gains and Credentials

Table 6—[AGENCY] Competitive Integrated Employment and Supported Employment

Outcomes

Table 7—[AGENCY] Students with Disabilities

Table 8—[AGENCY] Pre-Employment Transition Service Provision

Table 1—[AGENCY] Performance Profile

VR Program Performance

Employment Rate

Number of Participants Exiting in Competitive Integrated

Employment or Supported Employment

Percentage of Timely Eligibility Determinations

Percentage of Eligibility Determinations Extensions

Percentage of Timely IPE Development

Percentage of Initial IPE Extensions

Number of Applicants

Number of Individuals Determined Eligible

Number of Individuals with an IPE and No VR Services Provided

Number of Participants (with an IPE and VR Services Provided)

WIOA Performance Indicators (General/Blind VR agency)

Measurable Skill Gains Rate

Employment Rate in 2

Qtr After Exit

Median Earnings in 2

Qtr After Exit

Employment Rate in 4

Qtr After Exit

Credential Attainment Rate

WIOA Performance Indicators (State)

Measurable Skill Gains Rate

Employment Rate in 2

Qtr After Exit

Median Earnings in 2

Qtr After Exit

Employment Rate in 4

Qtr After Exit

Credential Attainment Rate

Calculation Table 1: Performance Profile

VR Program Performance

Number/Percentage

Employment Rate

RSA-911: (Total individuals with Data Element 354 Type of

Exit = 6 divided by Total individuals with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 4 or 6) multiplied by 100

Number of Individuals Exiting in Competitive

Integrated Employment or Supported

Employment

RSA-911: Total individuals with Data Element 354 Type Of

Exit = 6

Percentage of Timely Eligibility Determinations

RSA-911: (Total individuals with Data Element 38 Date of

Eligibility Determination during the PY and Data Element

39 Eligibility Determination Extension = 0 where Data

Element 38 minus Data Element 7 Date of Application is

less than or equal to 60 days divided by Total individuals

with Data Element 38 during the PY and Data Element 39 =

0) multiplied by 100

Percentage of Eligibility Determination

Extensions

RSA-911: (Total individuals with Data Element 38 during

the PY and Data Element 39 = 1 divided by Total individuals

with Data Element 38 during the PY) multiplied by 100

Percentage of Timely IPE Development

RSA-911: (Total individuals with the earlier of Data

Element 48 Date of Most Recent or Amended IPE and Data

Element 127 Start Date of Initial VR Service On or After

IPE during the PY and within 90 days or later of Data

Element 38 Date of Eligibility Determination or Data

Element 41 Date of Exit from OOS Waiting List, divided by

Total individuals with Data Element 48 during the PY)

multiplied by 100. * PY 2020 calculation will be adjusted to

use data element 398 – Date of Initial IPE in place of data

element 48

Percentage of Initial IPE Extensions

RSA-911: (Total individuals with Data Element 398 during

the PY and Data Element 399 = 1 divided by Total

individuals with Data Element 398 during the PY) multiplied

by 100

Number of Applicants

RSA-911: Total individuals with Data Element 7 Date of

Application during the PY

Number of Individuals Determined Eligible

RSA-911: Total individuals with Data Element 38 Date of

Eligibility Determination during the PY

Number of Individuals with an IPE and No VR

Services Provided

RSA-911: Total individuals with Data Element 48 Date of

Most Recent or Amended IPE during the Program Year and

Data Element 127 Start Date of Initial VR Service On or

After IPE is blank

Number of Participants (with an IPE and VR

Services Provided)

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 12 for PY

WIOA Performance Indicators

Number/Percentage

Measurable Skill Gains Rate

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 32 for PY

Employment Rate in 2

Qtr After Exit

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 16 for PY

Median Earnings in 2

Qtr After Exit

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 26 for PY

Employment Rate in 4

Qtr After Exit

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 19 for PY

Credential Attainment Rate

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 29 for PY

Table 2—[AGENCY] Types of Exit

Individuals Who Exited the VR Program

Number of Individuals Who Exited the VR Program

Exit Type

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Individual exited as an

applicant, prior to eligibility

determination or trial work

experience

Individual exited during or

after a trial work experience

Individual exited after

eligibility, but from an order of

selection waiting list

Individual exited after

eligibility, but prior to a signed

IPE

Individual exited after an IPE

without an employment

outcome

Individual exited after an IPE

in noncompetitive and/or

nonintegrated employment

Individual exited after an IPE

in competitive and integrated

employment or supported

employment

Individual exited as an

applicant after being

determined ineligible for VR

services

Supported Employment

Number of

Participants

Number of

Participants

Number of

Participants

Number of Participants Who Exited with a Supported Employment

Outcome in Competitive Integrated Employment

Number of Participants Who Exited with a Supported Employment

Outcome in Noncompetitive and/or Nonintegrated Employment

Calculation Table 2: Types of Exit

Number of Individuals Who Exited the VR

Program

RSA-911: Total number of individuals where Data

Element 353 Date of Exit within PY

Exit Type

Number of Individuals

Percent

Individual exited as an applicant,

prior to eligibility determination or

trial work experience

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 0

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 0 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited during or after a

trial work experience

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 1

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 1 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited after eligibility,

but from an order of selection

waiting list

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 2

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 2 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited after eligibility,

but prior to a signed IPE

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 3

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 3 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited after an IPE

without an employment outcome

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 4

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 4 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited after an IPE in

noncompetitive and/or

nonintegrated employment

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 5

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 5 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited after an IPE in

competitive and integrated

employment or supported

employment

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 6

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Individual exited as an applicant

after being determined ineligible for

VR services

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 7

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 7 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Potentially eligible individual exited

after receiving preemployment

transition services and has not

applied for VR services. Code no

longer available as of PY 2020.

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

354 Type of Exit = 8

RSA-911: (Total number of

individuals where Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 8 divided by

Number of Individuals Who Exited

the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Supported Employment

Number

Number of Participants Who Exited with a Supported

Employment Outcome in Competitive Integrated

Employment

RSA-911: Total number of individuals where Data

Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

356 Employment Outcome at Exit = 5

Number of Participants Who Exited in Supported

Employment with Noncompetitive and/or Nonintegrated

Employment

RSA-911: Total number of individuals where Data

Element 354 Type of Exit = 5 and Data Element

356 Employment Outcome at Exit = 5

Table 3—[AGENCY] Reasons for Exit

Reason for Exit

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Health/Medical

Death of Individual

Reserve Forces Called to

Active Duty

Ineligible after determined

eligible

Criminal Offender

No Disabling Condition

Transferred to Another Agency

Achieved Competitive

Integrated Employment

Outcome

Extended Employment

Extended Services Not

Available

UN/Able to Locate or Contact

No Longer Interested in

Receiving Services or Further

Services

All Other Reasons

Short-Term Basis Period

Ineligible: Pursuant to 511

Ineligible: Following Trial

Work

Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program

Calculation Table 3: Reasons for Exit

Reason for Exit

Number

Percent

Health/Medical

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 2

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

2 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Death of Individual

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 3

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

3 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Reserve Forces Called to Active

Duty

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 4

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

4 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Ineligible after determining

eligible

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 6

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

6 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Criminal Offender

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 7

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

7 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

No Disabling Condition

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 8

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

8divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Transferred to Another Agency

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 13

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

13 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Achieved Competitive

Integrated Employment

Outcome

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 14

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

14 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Extended Employment

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 15

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

15 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Reason for Exit Number

Percent

Extended Services Not

Available

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 16

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

16 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

UN/Able to Locate or Contact

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 17

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

17 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

No Longer Interested in

Receiving Services or Further

Services

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 18

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

18 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

All Other Reasons

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 19

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

19 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Short Term Basis Period

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 20

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

20 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Ineligible: Pursuant to 511

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 21

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

21 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Ineligible: Following Trial Work

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

355 Reason for Exit = 22

RSA-911: (Total number of individuals

where Data Element 355 Reason for Exit =

22 divided by Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program) multiplied by 100

Number of Individuals Who

Exited the VR Program

RSA-911: Total number of

individuals where Data Element

353 Date of Exit within PY

N/A

Table 4—[AGENCY] VR Service Provision

VR Service Provision

Total Number of Individuals Who Received VR Services

Training Services

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Graduate Degree Training

Bachelor Degree Training

Junior or Community College

Training

Occupational or Vocational

Training

On-the-Job Training

Apprenticeship Training

Basic Academic Remedial or

Literacy Training

Job Readiness Training

Disability Related Skills

Training*

Miscellaneous Training

Randolph-Sheppard

Entrepreneurial Training

Customized Training

Work-Based Learning

Experience

Career Services

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Assessment*

Diagnosis and Treatment of

Impairment

Vocational Rehabilitation

Counseling and Guidance*

Job Search Assistance

Job Placement Assistance

Short-Term Job Supports

Supported Employment

Services

Information and Referral

Services*

Benefits Counseling*

Customized Employment

Services

Extended Services (for youth

with the most significant

disabilities)

Other Services

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Number of

Individuals

Percent

Transportation*

Maintenance*

Rehabilitation Technology*

Personal Attendant Services*

Technical Assistance Services

Reader Services*

Interpreter Services*

Other Services

* Indicates RSA-911 Service Categories that do not require an individualized plan for employment (IPE)

Calculation Table 4: VR Service Provision

Total Number of Individuals Who

Received VR Services

Amended Joint Performance Specs: Item 12

Count of UNIQUE individuals where Element 7 Application Date is

not blank and Element 353 Date of Exit within the report period or

Element 353 Date of Exit is null

Training Service

Number/Percent

Calculation: To determine the number of participants who received

each of the specified services, sum the number of individuals (those

with Data Element 7 that is not blank) where services provided is

greater than 0.

To determine the percentage receiving the specified service, divide the

number of participants who received the specified service in the PY by

the total number of participants served and multiply by 100.

Career Services

Number/Percent

To determine the percentage receiving the specified service, divide the

number of participants who received the specified service in the PY by

the total number of participants served and multiply by 100.etermine

the percentage receiving the specified service, divide the number of

participants who received the specified service in the PY by the total

number of participants served and multiply by 100.

Other Services

Number/Percent

To determine the percentage receiving the specified service, divide the

number of participants who received the specified service in the PY by

the total number of participants served and multiply by 100.

Table 5— [AGENCY] Measurable Skill Gains and Credentials

Type of Measurable Skill Gains Earned

Number

Educational Functioning Level

Secondary Diploma

Postsecondary Transcript/Report Card

Training Milestone

Skills Progression

Total

Participants Who Earned Measurable

Skill Gains

Number/Percent

Number of Participants Who Earned Measurable Skill

Gains

Percent of Participants Eligible to Earned Measurable

Skill Gains

Type of Credentials Earned

Number

Secondary

Postsecondary

Total

Participants Who Earned Credentials

Number/Percent

Number of Participants Who Earned Credentials

Percent of Participants Eligible to Earn Credentials

Calculation Table 5: Measurable Skill Gains and Credentials

Measurable Skill Gains

Calculation

Educational Functioning Level

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY and a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Educational Functioning

Level (EFL) within the PY

Secondary Diploma

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY and a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Secondary within the PY

Postsecondary Transcript/Report Card

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY and a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Postsecondary

Transcript/Report Card within the PY

Training Milestone

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY 2017 and

a Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Tra

ining Milestone within

the PY

Skills Progression

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY and a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Skills Progression within

the PY

Number of Participants Who Earned

Measurable Skill Gains

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY , and a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Educational Functioning

Level(EFL) within the PY or a Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill

Gain: Secondary within the PY or a Date of Most Recent Measurable

Skill Gain: Postsecondary Transcript/Report Card within the PY or a

Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Training Milestone within

the PY or a Date of Most Recent Measurable Skill Gain: Skills

Progression within the PY

Percent of Participants Eligible to Earn

Measurable Skill Gains

RSA-911: The number of Participants who had a Date Enrolled During

Program Participation in an Education or Training Program Leading to a

Recognized Postsecondary Credential before the end of the PY divided

by number of participants in PY, multiply by 100

Credentials

Calculation

Secondary

RSA-911: Number of participants within the exit cohort that were in a

secondary education program and who obtained a secondary school

diploma or its recognized equivalent during the program or within one

year after exit AND who were also employed OR enrolled in an

education or training program leading to a recognized postsecondary

credential within one year after exit.

Postsecondary

Number of participants within the exit cohort that were in a

postsecondary education or training program and earned a

postsecondary credential during program participation or within one

year of exit. The date on which a participant earns a credential occurs

during program participation OR within one year of exit. Count the

numbers that have at least one postsecondary degree earned, if an

individual earned more than one type, only one postsecondary credential

applies.

Number of Participants Who Earned

Credentials

Number of participants who exited that were either in a postsecondary

education or training program and who obtained a recognized

postsecondary credential during the program or within one year after

exit; or were in a secondary education program and who obtained a

secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent during the

program or within one year after exit AND who were also employed or

enrolled in an education or training program leading to a recognized

postsecondary credential within one year after exit. Participants who

achieve multiple credentials are included based on the highest credential

attained for that period of participation.

Percent of Participants Eligible to

Earn Credentials

RSA-911: The number of participants within the appropriate exit cohort

who were either in a postsecondary education or training program during

program participation; or were in a secondary education program

without a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent divided

by the total number of participants within the exit cohort.

Table 6— [AGENCY] Competitive Integrated Employment and Supported Employment Outcomes

Participants Who Exited in Competitive Integrated

Employment or Supported Employment

Number of Participants Who Exited in Competitive

Integrated Employment or Supported Employment

Median Hourly Earnings at Exit

Median Hours Worked per Week at Exit

Public Support at Exit

Number of

Participants

Percent

Number of

Participants

Percent

Number of

Participants

Percent

Social Security Disability

Insurance at Exit

Supplemental Security Income

for the Aged, Blind, or Disabled

at Exit

Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families at Exit

Other Public Support at Exit

Medical Insurance Coverage

at Exit

Number of

Participants

Percent

Number of

Participants

Percent

Number of

Participants

Percent

Medicaid at Exit

Medicare at Exit

State or Federal Affordable

Care Act Exchange at Exit

Public Insurance from Other

Sources at Exit

Private Insurance Through

Employer at Exit

Not Yet Eligible for Private

Insurance Through Employer at

Exit

Private Insurance Through

Other Means at Exit

Calculation Table 6: Competitive Integrated Employment and Supported Employment Outcomes

Participants Who Exited in

Competitive Integrated Employment

or Supported Employment

Calculation

Number of Participants Who Exited in

Competitive Integrated Employment or

Supported Employment

RSA-911: Total participants with Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6

Median Hourly Earnings at Exit

RSA-911: Data Element 359 Hourly Wage values are listed in order,

from the lowest to the highest value. The value in the middle of this

list is the median hourly earnings value, so there is the same quantity

of numbers above the median number as there is below the median

number where Data Element 353 Date of Exit falls within the

Program Year, Data Element 127 Start Date of Initial VR Service On

or After IPE is not blank, Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6

Median Hours Worked per Week at Exit

RSA-911: Data Element 360 Hours Worked in a Week at Exit values

are listed in order, from the lowest to the highest value. The value in

the middle of this list is the median hourly earnings value, so there is

the same quantity of numbers above the median number as there is

below the median number where Data Element 353 Date of Exit falls

within the Program Year, Data Element 127 Start Date of Initial VR

Service On or After IPE is not blank, Data Element 354 Type of Exit =

Public Support at Exit

Number

Percent

Social Security Disability

Insurance at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 1

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 1 divided by number of

participants with Data Element 354 Type of

Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Supplemental Security

Income for the Aged,

Blind, or Disabled at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 2

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 2 divided by number of

participants with Data Element 354 Type of

Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 3

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 3 divided by number of

participants with Data element 354 Type of

Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Other Public Support at

Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 4

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 396 = 4 divided by number of

participants with Data Element 354 Type of

Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Medical Insurance

Coverage at Exit

Number

Percent

Medicaid at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘1’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘1’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Medicare at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘2’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘2’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

State or Federal Affordable

Care Act Exchange at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘3’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘3’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Public Insurance from

Other Sources at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘4’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘4’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Private Insurance Through

Employer at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘5’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘5’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Not Yet Eligible for

Private Insurance Through

Employer at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘6’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘7’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Private Insurance Through

Other Means at Exit

RSA-911: Total number of

participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 and Data Element

397 includes a code of ‘7’

RSA-911: Total number of participants with

Data Element 354 Type of Exit = 6 and Data

Element 397 includes a code of ‘7’divided by

number of participants with Data Element 354

Type of Exit = 6 multiplied by 100

Table 7— [AGENCY] Students with Disabilities

Students with Disabilities

Number/

Percentage of

Students

Number/

Percentage of

Students

Number/

Percentage of

Students

Total Students with Disabilities Reported

Students with Disabilities Reported with 504

Accommodation

Students with Disabilities Reported with the

Individualized Education Program (IEP)

Students with Disabilities Reported without 504

Accommodation or IEP

Total Students with Disabilities Who Received a

Pre-Employment Transition Service

Potentially Eligible Students with Disabilities

Who Received a Pre-Employment Transition

Service

Students with Disabilities, Who Applied for VR

Services, and Received a Pre-Employment

Transition Service

Percentage of Students with Disabilities Reported

Who Received a Pre-Employment Transition

Service

Calculation Table 7: Students with Disabilities

Students with Disabilities

Number/Percentage of Students

Total Students with Disabilities

Reported

RSA-911: Total cases where Data Element 22 Student with a

Disability = 1 and 2 and 3

Students with Disabilities Reported with

504 Accommodation

RSA-911: Total cases where Data Element 22 Student with a

Disability = 1

Students with Disabilities Reported with

IEP

RSA-911: Total cases where Data Element 22 Student with a

Disability = 2

Students with Disabilities Reported

without 504 Accommodation or IEP

RSA-911: Total cases where Data Element 22 Student with a

Disability = 3

Total Students with Disabilities Who

Received a Pre-Employment Transition

Service

RSA-911: Total cases where Data Element 97 Job Exploration

Counseling Provided by VR Agency Staff (in-house), Data Element

98 Job Exploration Counseling Provided Through VR Agency

Purchase, Data Element 103 Work Based Learning Experiences

Provided by VR Agency Staff (in-house), Data Element 104 Work

Based Learning Experiences Provided Through VR Agency Purchase,

Data Element 109 Counseling on Enrollment Opportunities Provided

by VR Agency Staff (in-house), Data Element 110 Counseling on

Enrollment Opportunities Provided Through VR Agency Purchase,

Data Element 115 Workplace Readiness Training Provided by VR

Agency Staff (in-house), Data Element 116 Workplace Readiness

Training Provided Through VR Agency Purchase, Data Element 121

Instruction in Self Advocacy Provided by VR Agency Staff (inhouse),

Data Element 122 Instruction in Self Advocacy Provided Through VR

Agency Purchase = 1 and Data Element 22 Student with a Disability =

1,2, or 3

Students with Disabilities

Number/Percentage of Students

Potentially Eligible Students with

Disabilities Who Received a Pre-

Employment Transition Service