Kaine Leads Colleagues in Calling for Study on Post-Secondary Outcomes for Students with Disabilities

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, led his colleagues in a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting that the Trump-Vance Administration conduct a study to help improve post-secondary outcomes for American students with disabilities. The letter comes shortly after the Administration announced it will further gut the Department of Education by shifting the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services—a move Kaine has slammed.

“We write to ask that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) examine how states and local school districts are implementing post-secondary transition services for youth with disabilities served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehab Act) as amended by Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA),” wrote the senators. “Transition services are defined by law as a coordinated set of activities that support movement from school to post-school life, representing one of the most consequential supports for determining long-term outcomes of youth with disabilities.”

“While federal law has been amended over time to improve the quality of services provided in each state, data continues to show that these services are inconsistently administered and insufficiently studied, leaving millions of students unprepared for life after high school,” the senators continued.

“We deeply appreciate GAO’s previous work analyzing services that help students with disabilities transition from school to work and believe this inquiry would provide critical insight into how to raise expectations and improve post-school outcomes for students with disabilities nationwide.” the senators concluded.

As a member of HELP, Kaine has long supported equitable access to education for students with disabilities. In September 2025, Kaine introduced the Protecting Students with Disabilities Act to ensure that special education programs at the Department of Education continue. Last July, Kaine introduced the Charting My Path to Future Success Act that would restore canceled federal funding designed to help students with disabilities succeed in adulthood. Also last year, Kaine and colleagues wrote a letter to the U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon emphasizing the immense harm shuttering the Department of Education would have on the millions of students with disabilities across the United States. He also cosponsored the IDEA Full Funding Act, legislation that would ensure Congress fulfills its commitment to fully fund the IDEA.

In addition to Kaine, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), and U.S. Representatives Bobby Scott (D-VA-03) and Lucy McBath (D-GA-06).

Full text of the letter is available here and below:

Dear Comptroller General Brown:

As of 2023, approximately 7.6 million children aged 3 through 21 received special education services and supports under IDEA, with each child entitled to an Individualized Education Program (IEP) outlining these services alongside a transition plan. IDEA requires post-school transition services to begin for youth no later than age 16, and include objectives to prepare youth for employment, independent living, community participation, and/or to pursue a continuing education. Pre-employment transition services (pre-ETS) offered through vocational rehabilitation (VR) programs under the Rehab Act are intended to support transition planning and schools’ provision of services. States are required to reserve at least 15 percent of funding for pre-ETS that include job exploration and post-secondary counseling, workplace readiness training, and instruction in self-advocacy to help eligible students with disabilities begin preparing for work, with permission to use any remaining funds towards supporting authorized activities.

Current outcomes raise concerns about our nation’s response to preparing youth with disabilities for higher education and competitive integrated employment. It is a moral imperative that students with disabilities are prepared for life after high school to the same degree as their peers. Yet, the transition period marks a major shift in federal protections, which consequently, hold significant implications for student preparedness. IDEA guarantees services and supports for eligible children with disabilities through at least age 21. Whereas access to supports in college or in the workplace is governed by rights afforded under Section 504 of the Rehab Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Students with disabilities experience a service cliff as they transition from one system to another. In this transition, they must learn to navigate college classrooms or workplaces on their own—often with insufficient support. This includes self-disclosure with appropriate documentation and requesting accommodations. A previous GAO study on the role of federal agencies on student outcomes documents frequent reports from families who had trouble navigating eligibility rules and coordinating between multiple agencies to secure services for their children. Many experience service delays and struggle to communicate or negotiate accommodations for their needs, some lose access to supportive services after high school, and several face increased hardships in succeeding within post-secondary environments.

Although current state reporting requirements include transition-related performance, with the percentage of youth receiving secondary transition services and general post-school outcomes related to education and employment included, there are no transition service specific data collection requirements under IDEA. Current reporting simply provides national level insight into states’ past and current post-secondary outcomes, with very little information on how states are implementing transition services and who are receiving them. Similarly, WIOA requires annual state performance reporting on core programs with VR state agencies reporting on the dollar expenditure for pre-ETS services. However, this expenditure is not provided as a percentage and the Rehabilitative Services Administration is not required to publish any consolidated report summarizing which states are meeting the 15 percent requirement, leaving the public and researchers with no easily accessible comparisons. Further, statewide performance reports detailing measurable skill gains from general VR programming do not provide breakdowns of outcomes for pre-ETS specific programs. The absence of transparent state-by-state reporting and oversight of statutory spending requirements attests to the need for GAO’s review. A 2018 GAO study examining state practices in pre-ETS implementation remains one of the most accessible, public sources for state-level pre-ETS fiscal compliance and implementation. Since the analysis, states have made efforts to spend more funding on pre-ETS. In 2018, less than half of states meet the 15 percent minimum, whereas in 2022, more than two-thirds have met the requirement.

Research also suggests high-quality transition services rely on factors that states and local school districts have historically faced challenges in meeting. Longstanding issues of access to pre-ETS prevent such services from reaching its full potential and Congress’ intent for broader reach, with only about 295,000 students receiving pre-ETS out of an estimated 3.1 million who were eligible in 2023. Further, many schools lack trained transition coordinators, with special education professionals often filling the role despite insufficient preparation and limited capacity. As Congress continues to fail drastically in fully funding IDEA, resource constraints also contribute to districts cutting costs to transition services and prematurely ceasing services. Emerging local examples already show some families losing access to transition programming before students demonstrate readiness. A bill introduced in Connecticut proposed to shorten the eligibility timeframe for services due to district funding limitations. Relatedly, a district in Texas was reported by parents and community advocates for cutting students off from transition services before age 21 marking services as “complete” with some families citing their child's inability to perform basic independent living tasks without substantial support.

Despite current limitations, existing research provides valuable insight on how transition services can be improved. One notable federally funded research study was Charting My Path for Future Success, with some 1,600 high school juniors enrolled across 13 school districts. Charting My Path aimed to assess the lasting impacts of transition services when support extends beyond basic federal compliance. The Institute of Sciences funded grant sponsoring Charting My Path supported small group goal setting, one-on-one mentoring, and family check-ins, but was ultimately cancelled by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. Yet, parent, student, and educational staff testimony all cited notable improvements for student participants within just a few months of the program’s duration. This immediate impact draws previously veiled attention to the importance of targeted transition services while this administration’s termination of the initiative, among 88 other research projects, underscores the need for alternative mechanisms to evaluate these services at the national level. Prior recommendations from the Department of Education have also stressed the importance of holistic transition services, citing early-college access through dual-enrollment partnership programs and structured skill-building opportunities as potentially valuable aspects of post-secondary readiness. Continued research is imperative to constructing viable policy and evidence-based recommendations for improved transition services.

As a nation, we are witnessing the outcomes for students with disabilities when transition services are not readily available, minimally implemented, or under-resourced and researched. Given the persistent challenges and high-staked life-long impacts on outcomes, we respectfully request that GAO investigate the following questions:

1. How are states administering and documenting transition services under IDEA and pre-ETS?
   1. How do practices vary at the state or district level? Particularly comparing states or districts with consistently low vs high graduation and post-school outcomes.
   2. What factors, such as administrative, fiscal, workforce, or structural barriers, most significantly support or hinder comprehensive transition implementation?
2. What is the impact of pre-ETS and IDEA transition services? What state-specific IDEA transition services and pre-ETS policies, procedures, or partnerships contribute to these results?
   1. To what extent have prior federal recommendations on transition planning and service delivery been implemented?
   2. How have states and districts utilized federal resources, such as the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition?
3. What are the strengths and limitations of existing data related to transition services and pre-ETS?
   1. How is RSA-911 data utilized to inform program implementation and technical assistance to state VR agencies?
   2. How is the information for transition-related performance indicators submitted by states under IDEA utilized to improve outcomes?
4. Since GAO’s 2018 report, how has pre-ETS implementation changed and what gaps remain?
   1. Have states progressed in meeting the 15 percent pre-ETS requirement? What are student participation rates, including demographic disaggregation, for pre-ETS across states?
   2. To what extent, are agencies using remaining funding towards authorized activities? What authorized activities are VR agencies engaged in to support students?
   3. How could pre-ETS program quality and implementation be improved, including outreach and identification of eligible youth?
5. Since GAO’s 2012 report, how has the federal government improved coordination among the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor, and the Social Security Administration related to transition services and activities?

Sincerely,

###