A Description and Analysis of State Policy Frameworks Regarding Order of Selection Under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act

Found in: 
Order of Selection
Authored by: 
Bobby Silverstein

Publication Year: 2010

Report Prepared for

The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center
On Vocational Rehabilitation
Institute for Community Inclusion
University of Massachusetts, Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd.
Boston, MA 02125

Prepared by

Robert “Bobby” Silverstein, J.D.
1501 M Street, N.W., 7th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20005

In Partnership with

The Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation

JANUARY 11, 2010

This paper was funded, in part, by a grant (Grant No. H133VO70001B) from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). The opinions contained in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of NIDRR, RSA or any other office or agency of the U.S. Department of Education.


The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS), U.S. Department of Education, in announcing the funding opportunity for the Rehabilitation and Research Training Center (RRTC) on vocational rehabilitation, specified that the RRTC must focus on increasing knowledge of the order of selection provision used for prioritizing and providing services to individuals with the most significant disabilities when the State VR agency cannot serve all eligible individuals with disabilities under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act. The RRTC must contribute to this outcome by conducting research on the administration and implementation of the order of selection requirement.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the key policy elements included in the order of selection requirement and then analyze how the various states address each element. It is my expectation that this paper will help inform policymakers and other stakeholders about the OOS federal policy framework and policies currently used by states. It is not the purpose of this policy analysis to determine or judge the merits of any particular state policy and thus the descriptions of state policies included in this paper should not be construed as constituting “best practices”

Download the full paper

Pub Type