This study uses data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 to examine the rates at which youth with emotional disturbances received services during and up to 8 years after high school. Parents’ efforts to obtain services, information sources accessed, problems encountered, and the perceived sufficiency of services to meet youths’ needs are described. Findings show a drop in receipt rates for several services in the first 2 years post high school, relative to those received during high school, and a continued decrease thereafter. An increase in the reported effort to obtain services accompanied this decline in receipt rates. Implications for transition planning to build a better bridge from high school to the adult service systems are discussed and aspects of a research agenda are outlined.
AlgozzineB.BrowderD.KarvonenM.TestD. W.WoodW. M. (2001). Effects of interventions to promote self-determination for individuals with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 71, 219–277. doi:10.3102/00346-543071002219
2.
ArnettJ. J.TannerJ. L. (Eds.). (2006). Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
3.
AudS.KewalRamaniA.FrohlichL. (2011). America’s youth: Transitions to adulthood. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
4.
BeresfordB. (2004). On the road to nowhere? Young disabled people and transition. Child Care Health and Development, 30, 581–587.
5.
BetzC. L. (2004). Transition of adolescents with special health care needs: Review and analysis of the literature. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 27, 179–241.
6.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiment by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
BronfenbrennerU. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723–742.
8.
CametoR.LevineP.WagnerM. (2004). Transition planning for students with disabilities: A special topic report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
9.
CarterE. W.LaneK. L.PiersonM. R.GlaeserB. (2006). Self-determination skills and opportunities of transition-age youth with emotional disturbance and learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 333–346.
10.
CarterE. W.LunsfordL. B. (2005). Meaningful work: Improving employment outcomes for transition-age youth with emotional and behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 49, 63–69.
11.
CobbB.AlwellM. (2008). Transition planning/coordinating interventions for youth with disabilities: A systematic review. What works transition research synthesis. Retrieved from http://www.nsttac.org/pdf/what_works/2d_full_text.pdf
12.
Committee on Disability in America. (2007). Health care transitions for young people. In FieldM. J.JetteA. M. (Eds.), Future of disability in America (pp. 98-135). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
13.
GrigalM.NeubertD. A.MoonM. S.GrahamS. (2003). Self-determination for students with disabilities: Views of parents and teachers. Exceptional Children, 70, 97–112.
14.
GrobA.KringsF.BangerterA. (2001). Life markers in biographical narratives of people from three cohorts: A life span perspective in historical context. Human Development, 44, 171–190.
KohlerP. D.FieldS. (2003). Transition-focused education: Foundation for the future. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 174–183.
17.
LevineP.MarderC.WagnerM. (2004). Services and supports for secondary school students with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
18.
LevineP.WagnerM. (2005). Transition for young adults who received special education services as adolescents: A time of challenge and change. In OsgoodD. W.FosterE. M.FlanaganC.RuthG. R. (Eds.), On your own without a new: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations (p. 399). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
19.
MannD.StapletonD. (March, 2012). A roadmap to a 21st-century disability policy (Issue brief). Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
20.
MarderC.LevineP.WagnerM.CardosoD. (2003). Household characteristics of youth with disabilities. In WagnerM.MarderC.LevineP.CametoR.CadwalladerT. W.BlackorbyJ. (Eds.), The individual and household characteristics of youth with disabilities: A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (pp. 3-1–3-18.). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
21.
MartinJ. A.HamiltonB. E.VenturaS. J.OstermanM. J. K.WilsonE. C.MathewsT. J. (2012). Births: Final data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61(1), 1–71.
22.
National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. (2001a). Table 46. Youth with respondent-reported disabilities take medications to alter behavior or mood. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
23.
National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. (2001b). Table 59. Description of school youth attended past year. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
24.
National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. (2007). Table 187. Youth takes a prescription medication to control behavior, attention, or mood. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
25.
National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. (2009). Table 109: If out of secondary school, young adult attended a postsecondary institution and reported a disability, when school was aware young adult has a disability. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
26.
National Longitudinal Transition Study–2. (2010). Table 3. Where young adult lives now. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
27.
NewmanL.WagnerM.HuangT.ShaverD.KnockeyA.GreeneS.. . . ContrerasE. (2012). Secondary school programs and performance of students with disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
28.
NewmanL.WagnerM.KnokeyA.MarderC.NagleK.ShaverD.WeiX. (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). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
29.
OsgoodD. W.FosterE. M.FlanaganC.RuthG. R. (2005a). On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
30.
OsgoodD. W.FosterE. M.FlanaganC.RuthG. R. (2005b). Introduction: Why focus on the transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations? In OsgoodW.FosterE. M.FlanaganC.RuthG. R. (Eds.), On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
RevellG.MillerL. A. (2009). Navigating the world of adult services and benefits planning. In WehmanP.SmithM. D.SchallC. (Eds.), Autism and the transition to adulthood: Success beyond the classroom (pp. 139–162). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
32.
StewartD.FreemanM.HealyH.Burke-GaffneyJ.ForhanM.YoungN.GuentherS. (2012). Transition to adulthood for youth with disabilities: Evidence from the literature. In StoneJ. H.BlouinM. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of rehabilitation. Buffalo, NY: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange. Available at: Ahttp://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/110/.
33.
StewartD.LawM.RosenbaumP.WillmsD. G. (2001). A qualitative study of the transition to adulthood for youth with physical disabilities. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 21(4), 3–21.
34.
TannerJ. L. (2006). Recentering in emerging adulthood: A critical turning point in life span human development. In ArnettJ. J.TannerJ. L. (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 21-55). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
35.
TestD. W.FowlerC. H.RichterS. M.MazzottiV.WhiteJ.WalkerA. R.. . . KorteringL. (2009). Evidence-based practices in secondary transition. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 128–155. doi:10.1177/0885728809336859
36.
TrainorA. A. (2008). Using cultural and social capital to improve postsecondary outcomes and expand transition models for youth with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 42, 148–162.
37.
Vander StoepA.DavisM.CollinsD. (2000). Transition: A time of developmental and institutional clashes. In ClarkH. B.DavisM. (Eds.), Transition to adulthood: A resource for assisting young people with emotional or behavioral difficulties (pp. 3–28). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
38.
WagnerM. (1995). Outcomes for youths with serious emotional disturbance in secondary school and early adulthood. The Future of Children, 5, 90–112.
39.
WagnerM. (2005). Characteristics of out-of-school youth with disabilities. In WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.GarzaN.LevineP. (Eds.), After high school: A first look at the postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (pp. 2/1–2/8). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
40.
WagnerM.DavisM. (2006). How are we preparing students with emotional disturbances for the transition to young adulthood? Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 14, 86–96.
41.
WagnerM.KutashK.DuchnowskiA. J.EpsteinM. H. (2005). The Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS2): Study designs and implications for children and youth with emotional disturbances. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 13, 25–41.
42.
WagnerM.MarderC.LevineP.CametoR.CadwalladerT. W.BlackorbyJ.. . . NewmanL. (2003). The individual and household characteristics of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
43.
WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.GarzaN.LevineP. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
44.
WagnerM.NewmanL.JavitzH. (2014). The influence of family socioeconomic status on the post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 37, 5–17.
45.
WaltersD.ZanghiM.AnsellD.ArmstrongE.SutterK. (2011). Transition planning with adolescents: A review of principles and practices across systems. Tulsa, OK: National Resource Center for Youth Development.
46.
WardL.MallettR.HeslopP.SimonsK. (2003). Transition planning: How well does it work for young people with learning disabilities and their families?British Journal of Special Education, 30, 132–137.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B. (2003). Adult outcomes for students with cognitive disabilities three years after high school: The impact of self-determination. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 131–144.
49.
WehmeyerM. L.ShogrenK. A.ZagerD.SmithT. E. C.SimpsonR. (2010). Research-based principles and practices for educating students with autism: Self-determination and social interactions. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 475–486.
50.
WhittenburgD.GoldenT.FishmanM. (2002). Transition options for youth with disabilities: An overview of the programs and policies that affect the transition from school. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 17, 195–206.
51.
YoungN. L. (2007). The transition to adulthood for children with cerebral palsy: What do we know about their health care needs. Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics, 27, 476–479.
52.
YuJ.HuangT.NewmanL. (2008). Facts from NLTS2: Substance use among young adults with disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
