Youth with disabilities have much lower participation rates in postsecondary education compared with youth without disabilities. There is a need to understand ecological factors that influence their differential participation. This research examined the impact of parental receipt of welfare on postsecondary enrollment among youth with disabilities. Through a multivariate linear probability analysis of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), receipt of welfare benefits was observed to predict nearly one third of the adjusted probability difference in attending postsecondary education between youth with and without disabilities. The effects of parental and school characteristics on the probability of attending postsecondary education are also explored, and implications for service providers, practitioners, and researchers in transition to adulthood are discussed.
BataviaA. I.BeaulaurierR. L. (2001). The financial vulnerability of people with disabilities: Assesing poverty risks. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 28, 139-162.
2.
BlackS. E.DevereuxP. J. (2010). Recent developments in intergenerational mobility (NBER Working Paper No. 15889). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
3.
CarneiroP.MeghirC.PareyM. (2013). Maternal education, home environments, and the development of children and adolescents. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11, 123-160. doi: 10.1111/j.1542-4774.2012.01096.x
4.
CametoR.LevineP.WagnerM. (2004). Transition planning for students with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (Vol. 2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
5.
CarnevaleA. P.JayasunderaT.CheahB. A. N. (2013). The college advantage: Weathering the economic storm. Washington, DC. Retrieved from cew.georgetown.edu/collegeadvantage
CheathamG. A.SmithS. J.ElliottW.FriedlineT. (2013). Family assets, postsecondary education, and students with disabilities: Building on progress and overcoming challenges. Children and Youth Services Review, 35, 1078–1086. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.04.019
8.
ChiangH.-M.CheungY. K.HicksonL.XiangR.TsaiL. Y. (2012). Predictive factors of participation in postsecondary education for high school leavers with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42, 685–696. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1297-7
9.
DaviesP. S.RuppK.WittenburgD. (2009). A life-cycle perspective on the transition to adulthood among children receiving Supplemental Security Income payments. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 30, 133–151.
10.
DorenB.GauJ.LindstromL. (2012). The relationship between parent expectations and postschool outcomes of adolescents with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 79, 7–23.
FlanneryK. B.YovanoffP.BenzM. R.KatoM. M. (2008). Improving employment outcomes of individuals with disabilities through short-term postsecondary training. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31(1), 26–36. doi:10.1177/0885728807313779
13.
FlemingA. R.FairweatherJ. S. (2011). The role of postsecondary education in the path from high school to work for youth with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 55, 71–81. doi:10.1177/0034355211423303
14.
FoggN. P.HarringtonP. E.McMahonB. T. (2010). The impact of the Great Recession upon the unemployment of Americans with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 33, 193–202. doi:10.3233/JVR-2010-0527
15.
FrakerT.BairdP.MamunA.MannoM.MartinezJ.ReedD.ThompkinsA. (2012). The Social Security Administration’s youth transition demonstration projects: Interim report on the Career Transition Program. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
16.
FrakerT.RangarajanA. (2009). The Social Security Administration’s youth transition demonstration projects. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 30, 223–240. doi:10.3233/JVR-2009-0463
17.
HarrisK.Weinberger-DivackH. (2010). Asset building by people with disabilities. Clearinghouse Review Journal of Poverty Law and Policy, 44, 4–15.
18.
HartnettJ.MorrisM.StengelJ. (2008). Creating a roadmap out of poverty for Americans: A report on the relationship of the Employment and Training Administration’s Workforce Development System and local asset-building coalitions. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labour.
19.
HolzerH. J.DunlopE. (2013). Just the facts, ma’am: Postsecondary education and labor market outcomes in the U.S. Madison: Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin–Madison.
KarpurA.BrewerD.GoldenT. (2013). Critical program elements in transition to adulthood: Comparative analysis of New York State and the NLTS2. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2165143413476880
22.
KayeH. S. (2010). The impact of the 2007–09 recession on workers with disabilities. Monthly Labor Review, 133(10), 19–30.
23.
LindstromL.FlanneryB.BenzM.OlszewksiB.SlovicR. (2009). Building employment training partnerships between vocational rehabilitation and community colleges. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 52, 189–201.
24.
LombeM.HuangJ.PutnamM.CooneyK. (2012). Exploring saving performance in an IDA program: Findings for people with disabilities. Social Work Research, 34, 83–93.
25.
MadausJ. W. (2006). Employment outcomes of university graduates with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 19–31.
26.
MadausJ. W.ZhaoJ.RubanL. (2008). Employment satisfaction of university graduates with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 323–332.
27.
MoffittR. (1992). Incentive effects of the U.S. welfare system: A review. Journal of Economic Literature, 30, 1–61.
28.
Murphy-ErbyY.HamiltonL.ShobeM.ChristyK.Hampton-StoverE.JordanS. (2013). Preparing children for success: Parents’ perspectives on promoting savings and education. Journal of Family Issues. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0192513X13490398
29.
MurrayC. (2003). Risk factors, protective factors, vulnerability, and resilience: A framework for understanding and supporting the adult transitions of youth with high-incidence disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 16–26.
30.
NewmanL. (2005). Changes in postsecondary education participation of youth with disabilities. In WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.GarzaN.LevineP. (Eds.), After high school : A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (pp. 4-1 – 4-10). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
31.
NewmanL.WagnerM.KnokeyA.-M.MarderC.NagleK.ShaverD. . . . SchwartingM. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 8 years after high school: A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (pp. 15–51). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
32.
RoesslerR. T.HennesseyM. L.RumrillP. D. (2007). Strategies for improving career services for postsecondary students with disabilities: Results of a focus group study of key stakeholders. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30, 158–170. doi:10.1177/08857288070300030501
33.
ShandraC. L. (2011). Life-course transitions among adolescents with and without disabilities. International Journal of Sociology, 41, 67–86. doi:10.2753/IJS0020-7659410104
34.
SharpeM. N.JohnsonD. R.IzzoM.MurrayA. (2005). An analysis of instructional accommodations and assistive technologies used by postsecondary graduates with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 22, 3–11.
35.
StephensonF. (1997). Even the underprivileged are rational: The incentive effects of welfare. Journal of Labor Research, 18, 367–372.
36.
TestD. W.MazzottiV. L.MustianA. L.FlowerC. H.KorteringL. J.KohlerP. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving post-school outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional individuals, 32, 160–181.
37.
WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.GarzaN.LevineP. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities: A Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
38.
WiborgO. N.HansenM. N. (2008). Change over time in the intergenerational transmission of social disadvantage. European Sociological Review, 25, 379–394. doi:10.1093/esr/jcn055
