The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Final Report on Best Practices
For the Employment of People with Disabilities
In State Government

Printable version (PDF)

Table of Contents

Executive Summary


Part I: Recruiting and Hiring

Part II: Reasonable Accommodation

Part III: Protecting the Rights of Individuals With Disabilities on the Job

Part IV: Other Best Practices That Promote the Employment of People with Disabilities

Part V: Issues for Further Evaluation by States


Executive Summary

This report highlights best practices of nine states that promote the hiring, retention, and advancement of individuals with disabilities in state government jobs. The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is issuing this report as part of the agency's efforts in support of the New Freedom Initiative, President George W. Bush's comprehensive strategy for the full integration of people with disabilities into all aspects of America's social and economic life.

Despite progress made since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, people with disabilities still experience unemployment at a rate far above the national average. With more than five million workers nation-wide and with the unique opportunities they have to serve as model employers, state governments can play a significant role in enhancing employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

The governors of the nine participating states voluntarily allowed EEOC to review a wide range of best practices affecting individuals with disabilities who are state government employees or applicants for state employment. We examined state government practices related to the following:

This report also lists a number of what may be inadvertent barriers to the employment, retention, and advancement of qualified individuals with disabilities. We suggest that all states evaluate their practices to determine whether they include these or other barriers.

This report has two purposes. First, all employers, including the participating states, can learn from the best practices outlined in this report. Second, we are offering states free, informal technical assistance to promote voluntary compliance with the ADA.

Parts I through IV of the report discuss best practices, and Part V lists potential barriers. Following are some of EEOC's most significant findings:

Part I: Recruiting and Hiring

Part II: Reasonable Accommodation

Part III: Protecting the Rights of Individuals With Disabilities on the Job

Part IV: Other Best Practices That Promote the Employment of People with Disabilities

Part V: Issues for Further Evaluation by States


The report's conclusion notes several positive trends. Applicants for state employment are frequently given information about the availability of reasonable accommodations for the application process, and job announcements and position descriptions do not appear to be drafted in ways that would discourage people with disabilities from applying for state jobs. Some states have undertaken targeted outreach to and recruitment of individuals with disabilities. At this time there is insufficient data to assess the effectiveness of these efforts.

Supervisors, managers, and other state personnel responsible for the hiring, retention, and advancement of people with disabilities have access to sufficient information about their ADA obligations. The use of written procedures for providing reasonable accommodations, methods of documenting and tracking the disposition of requests, and the provision of appeal processes following denials of reasonable accommodations are also positive trends in some states. We were unable to determine the extent to which individuals with disabilities have been able to advance within state government once hired, since we saw little evidence that the states undertake any measures to determine the distribution of employees with disabilities among the various levels of the state government workforce.

Finally, we note that many of the best practices identified in the report resulted from legislative or executive actions. This sends a clear message "from the top" that the employment of people with disabilities is a priority for the states.


A. Background

This report details best practices undertaken by states to promote the hiring, retention, and advancement of individuals with disabilities in state government employment. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission") issued an interim report covering four states - Florida, Maryland, Vermont, and Washington - on October 29, 2004. (1) This final report covers those four states and five others - Kansas, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Utah.

Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (2) prohibits private and state and local government entities that employ fifteen or more employees from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities with respect to recruitment, the application process, hiring, advancement, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. (3) Employers covered by Title I of the ADA must also make reasonable accommodations so that qualified individuals with disabilities may participate in the application process, perform the essential (or fundamental) duties of a job, and enjoy the benefits and privileges of employment available to all employees.

Despite progress made as the result of the ADA, recent estimates still put the unemployment rate of people with severe disabilities at or near 70 percent. In response to this stubbornly high unemployment rate and other barriers that people with disabilities continue to face, President George W. Bush announced his New Freedom Initiative (NFI) on February 1, 2001. The NFI is the President's comprehensive strategy for the full integration of people with disabilities into all aspects of America's social and economic life. It promotes increased access to technology, education, the workplace, and community life. (4)

The EEOC enforces Title I of the ADA and has, since 2001, taken a lead role in helping to implement the NFI's employment goals. In addition to carrying out its traditional enforcement and litigation functions under the ADA, the EEOC has stepped up its outreach and technical assistance efforts. In April 2002, we began a series of free ADA workshops targeted to businesses with 15 to 100 employees. Since August 2002, we have distributed thousands of copies of The Americans with Disabilities Act: A Primer for Small Business. We have issued question-and-answer documents discussing how the ADA applies to specific disabilities in the workplace, such as diabetes, epilepsy, intellectual disabilities (i.e., mental retardation), and cancer and have published a guide that describes how Title I of the ADA applies to food service employers. We have also issued a question-and-answer document on telework as a reasonable accommodation. Finally, we have increased our outreach to people with disabilities through presentations at conferences sponsored by organizations of and for individuals with disabilities and publication of a question-and-answer document on the ADA for job applicants with disabilities. (5)

The EEOC has undertaken the "States' Best Practices Project" in part because of the number of people state governments employ (collectively more than five million), and because of the unique opportunities to serve as model employers for other public entities (such as county and municipal governments) and for the private sector. The purposes of this project are twofold. First, EEOC hopes that all states (as well as local governments and private employers) will learn from the best practices of the participating states. Second, EEOC is offering participating states free, informal, technical assistance to aid in voluntary compliance with the ADA.

B. Methodology

States were chosen for this study based in part on geographical diversity, the range in size of their workforces, and their differing personnel structures. Appendix A to this report includes information about the size of each participating state's workforce and a description of each state's personnel structure.

The nine selected states voluntarily participated in this study. EEOC provided the states general guidelines concerning the kind of information we wished to review. We wanted to find out what individuals with disabilities would encounter when applying for state employment and what they would experience on the job. The information we requested included the following:

Representatives from the EEOC held an initial teleconference with representatives from each state. The states determined who would provide information to the EEOC and what state agencies would be the subject of the review. Following the teleconference, EEOC submitted a Request for Information to each state, reviewed the documents provided in response to the request, and conducted follow-up interviews with state officials to clarify or expand upon information in the documents provided. All participating states reviewed and commented on a draft final report prior to publication.

Because the EEOC relied on self-reporting, it is possible that we have not learned about all state activities that contribute positively to the employment of people with disabilities in state government. Additionally, not all activities designated by states as "best practices" have necessarily been included here. We did not include activities we deemed merely to satisfy the states' legal obligations under the ADA. Also, when most or all states engaged in a similar practice, we sometimes offered only representative examples of the practice from a few states. Appendix B to this report is a list of state contacts who can provide more information about the practices identified in this report and perhaps others.

C. Overview

This report has five main parts and a conclusion.

Part I: Recruiting and Hiring

A. Targeted Recruitment and Outreach

The following section discusses ways that the states surveyed by the EEOC have attempted to increase the representation of qualified individuals with disabilities in their hiring pools and in their workforces. Recruitment and outreach efforts are of essentially two types - those that seek to increase the number of applicants with disabilities for state jobs that are available to the general public, and hiring or training programs designed specifically for individuals with disabilities.

1. Efforts to Increase the Pool of Qualified Applicants with Disabilities

Maryland, New Mexico, Vermont, and Washington reported the following practices aimed at increasing the number of individuals with disabilities in state government jobs:

2. Hiring Programs Specifically for People with Disabilities

Two states - Washington and Vermont - have programs that specifically train and/or hire individuals with disabilities for state jobs.

B. Job Announcements and Job Applications

The ADA does not require employers to use a specific type of job announcement or job application form. Some practices related to job announcements and applications, however, may discourage individuals with disabilities from applying for jobs. For example, a deaf individual who uses a sign language interpreter to communicate might not apply for a position described as requiring "good oral communication skills." Similarly, a job announcement that fails to differentiate between a position's essential (or fundamental) and marginal functions may discourage individuals whose disabilities make them unable to do the marginal functions from applying for the position, even though they may still be considered "qualified" under the ADA. (6)

On the other hand, employers can take several positive steps to ensure that their job announcements and job applications do not inadvertently exclude qualified individuals with disabilities from the applicant pool.

1. Identifying Essential Job Functions

Several states reported on the efforts they make to identify essential and marginal functions in job announcements and position descriptions.

2. Availability of Reasonable Accommodations

Most of the states we surveyed take some measures to make potential applicants with disabilities aware of the availability of reasonable accommodations for the application process. For example:

C. Interviews

The interview process is an applicant's opportunity to convince the employer that he or she is the best qualified person for the job. The ADA seeks to ensure that this is as true for people with disabilities as for all other applicants. The law requires that reasonable accommodations be made for the application and interview process, (7) such as conducting the interview somewhere that is accessible to a person in a wheelchair or providing a sign language interpreter for someone who is deaf. The ADA also seeks to ensure that applicants with disabilities are evaluated solely on the basis of their qualifications. Consequently, the law prohibits employers from asking about an applicant's disability before a job offer has been made. (8)

These legal protections, however, are insufficient if individuals involved in the interview process are unaware of them. The following are some steps that states have taken to make their employment interview processes effective for people with disabilities.

D. Mentoring

Mentoring programs offer students with disabilities information about employment opportunities and access to positive role models. The American Association of People with Disabilities and the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Disability Employment Policy co-sponsor National Disability Mentoring Day every October, as part of National Disability Employment Awareness Month. In 2001, Kansas replicated this effort at the state level, and Vermont and Maryland did so in 2003. Following are descriptions of how Maryland and Vermont have used Disability Mentoring Day specifically as an opportunity to encourage individuals with disabilities to work for the state.

For more information about states' participation in National Disability Mentoring Day, see Section IV.E, below.

Part II: Reasonable Accommodation

A. Reasonable Accommodation Procedures

The ADA requires covered employers to provide reasonable accommodations to the known physical and mental limitations of qualified individuals with disabilities. One way that an employer can promote compliance with this obligation is to have in place procedures that clearly define the responsibilities of everyone involved in the reasonable accommodation process and that enable tracking and prompt resolution of accommodation requests. The following subsections detail various ways in which the subject states ensure that requests for reasonable accommodations are handled appropriately.

1. Reasonable Accommodation Procedures

Our survey revealed essentially four models used to promote prompt processing of reasonable accommodation requests. This report does not endorse a particular model. The choice of how to provide a reasonable accommodation depends on such factors as the size of a state's workforce, the structure of its personnel system, and the familiarity of the individuals involved in the accommodation process with their legal obligations.

2. Timelines

The ADA does not prescribe a specific time frame within which reasonable accommodations must be provided; however, accommodations must be provided without undue delay. The amount of time necessary to provide an accommodation may depend on factors such as the nature of the accommodation, the complexity of the decision-making process (e.g., whether a disability is obvious or must be determined by reviewing medical documentation), and the difficulty of providing the accommodation (e.g., whether it involves a simple modification of a policy or the acquisition of equipment).

Despite the various factors that may affect the length of time needed to provide an accommodation, the use of timelines in reasonable accommodation procedures emphasizes the importance of prompt processing of accommodation requests, promotes accountability of those involved in the accommodation process (including the requester), and serves as a guide for assessing, and where necessary, revising procedures.

Two states - Florida and Kansas - reported to us that at least some of their agencies have reasonable accommodation procedures that include timelines. For example, the Florida Department of Education requires division directors to notify the ADA Coordinator of all requests for reasonable accommodation within two business days. The Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services requires a decision within 30 calendar days of the date on which an accommodation was requested.

3. Denial of Reasonable Accommodation

Not every requested accommodation can or should be granted. However, an employer can minimize the chance that an accommodation will be inappropriately denied by: (1) establishing procedures that ensure the denial has been properly reviewed and can be justified; and/or (2) providing employees with an opportunity to have an initial denial reviewed.

4. Documenting and Tracking Requests for Reasonable Accommodation

Documenting and tracking information about reasonable accommodation requests can help employers evaluate their performance in responding to them and implement measures to improve performance where necessary. Among other things, documenting and tracking may enable a state agency to determine how long it takes to respond to requests for different types of reasonable accommodations; whether there are particular types of reasonable accommodations that the employer has been unable to provide; whether there are agency components that have not granted requests for reasonable accommodations; and the reasons for denials. Where, for example, there have been repeated delays in the processing of reasonable accommodation requests, an agency can investigate the reasons for the problem and take steps necessary to correct it.

It may be helpful to document the request for accommodation and the steps taken in response to the request.

Two states reported on measures undertaken to identify the extent to which accommodations were granted or denied.

5. Centralized Funding for the Cost of Reasonable Accommodations

The ADA does not require a statewide source for funding reasonable accommodations. However, a centralized funding source may promote the hiring of people with disabilities by removing disincentives that result from concerns that the cost of reasonable accommodations will be charged against the budgets of individual offices, departments, or agencies. Such a funding scheme makes sense, moreover, because the ADA would likely require assessment of whether the cost of a particular accommodation would pose an undue hardship in light of the resources available to an entire state agency or potentially to the state as a whole.

None of the states we surveyed appear to have a statewide mechanism for funding reasonable accommodations. However, two states - Utah and Washington - reported promising practices that allow individual state agencies to draw upon resources in addition to their own budgets to pay for at least some accommodations.

6. Ensuring the Confidentiality of Medical Information

The ADA requires that all medical information obtained from an applicant or employee be kept separate from personnel files and treated as a confidential medical record. Disclosures of confidential medical information are permitted only in very limited circumstances, including to supervisors and managers in connection with work restrictions or necessary accommodations. (9)

The effectiveness of an employer's reasonable accommodation procedures depend to a great extent on the ability to ensure individuals with disabilities that confidentiality of their medical information will be maintained. Applicants or employees (particularly those with hidden disabilities) may be more likely to ask for an accommodation if they know that information they disclose to support their requests will not be shared with co-workers or with other individuals who do not need the information.

Utah reported promising practices to ensure compliance with the ADA's confidentiality requirements:

B. Innovative Accommodation Solutions

The following section discusses the ways that some states may exceed the ADA's reasonable accommodation obligation, as well as numerous methods for promoting the provision of accommodations required by the law.

1. Measures that Exceed ADA Obligations

Although state employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations only to qualified individuals with disabilities, taking measures that go beyond this legal obligation may make sense under certain circumstances. For example, providing an accommodation so that someone with a temporary, non-chronic condition of short duration can continue working may enable an employer to benefit from the employee's continued productivity on the job and save the employer costs (such as workers' compensation) of having the employee out of work. Temporary accommodations may enable a worker who has made a request for reasonable accommodation under the ADA to continue working while a final determination of whether to grant or deny the accommodation is being made. A state might even determine that accommodating individuals on a longer-term basis who do not technically meet the ADA's definition of "disability" is preferable to losing a valuable worker.

2. Accommodation Solutions Related to Assistive Technology

Part III: Protecting the Rights of Individuals With Disabilities on the Job

Employers must make sure that, once hired, individuals with disabilities have the tools they need to succeed and the same opportunities for advancement as other employees. In addition to practices specifically designed to provide opportunities for advancement, this part also considers how periodic training can work to prevent discrimination.

A. Activities That Specifically Promote the Retention and Advancement of Employees with Disabilities

The Maryland Aviation Administration specifically addresses in its bi-annual supervisory ADA training the issue of how to promote career development for individuals with disabilities. Using the publication "Career Development for Persons with Disabilities," produced in 2000 by the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities (11) and available online at as a resource, the training addresses topics such as:

B. Training

Most of the states we surveyed indicated that training on the ADA is provided for managers and supervisors either on a statewide or agency-wide basis. Section I.C, above, identifies some of the training states provide on the recruitment and hiring process. The following are a few examples of more comprehensive training specifically on issues concerning disability and employment.

Some training on disability has been incorporated into training on diversity issues more generally.

Part IV: Other Best Practices That Promote the Employment of People with Disabilities

All of the states we surveyed undertake a number of practices, in addition to traditional vocational rehabilitation services, to promote the employment of people with disabilities in both the public and private sectors. The following sections describe some of the most significant practices, including legislative and executive action, internships, and public/private partnerships.

A. Legislative and Executive Actions

B. Access to Information and Assistive Technology

The efforts that several states have undertaken to provide individuals with disabilities access to information communicated on state agency websites, and to provide access to assistive technology are noteworthy. Three states - Florida, Kansas, and New Hampshire - have taken significant steps to ensure a level of accessibility of state websites that meets or exceeds the level of accessibility required of the federal government under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. Section 508 requires that all electronic and information technology purchased, maintained, or used by the federal government be "readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities" unless this would cause "undue hardship." This commitment will assist applicants with disabilities in using websites to learn about and apply for jobs with state agencies, current state employees with disabilities who use assistive technology to do their jobs, and individuals with disabilities looking for resources related to employment in both the public and private sectors. The Brown University Center for Public Policy's annual study of state and federal e-government found that Kansas has the second highest percentage of accessible web sites for people with disabilities, and that New Hampshire ranks fourth.

C. Internship Programs

The Maryland Department of Budget and Management sponsored the Governor's QUEST Internship Program for Persons with Disabilities. Initiated in 2000, the program provides three-month internships in state government, with the possibility of an extension. QUEST, which stands for "Quality, Understanding, Excellence, Success, and Training," is a training/learning experience for customers of the state's Department of Rehabilitation Services, designed to enhance the participants' knowledge, skills, and abilities while working at a state agency. The internship program has included positions such as Communications and Marketing Trainee, Activity Therapy Aide, Graphics Assistant, Dietary Worker, Fiscal Accounts Clerk, Medicaid Program Associate, Maintenance Assistance, Office Clerk, Junior Accountant, Computer Information Services Specialist, Parole & Probation Caseload Aide, Residential Program Advisor, Buyer's Clerk, Real Estate Administrative Assistant, Publications and Community Relations Trainee, Payroll Clerk, and Personnel Associate.

QUEST interns receive a $3,000 stipend. While there is no implied offer of employment to participants beyond the volunteer period, a number of past interns have applied for and been placed into positions based on the experience gained in their internship. The state reports that approximately 50% of all past QUEST interns are presently employed in their target job areas in either private or public sector positions.

D. Public/Private Partnerships

Three states - Florida, Missouri, and Vermont - identified partnerships they have with business and/or community organizations to promote the employment of individuals with disabilities.

E. Other State Actions That Promote the Employment of People with Disabilities

Part V: Issues for Further Evaluation by States

The following section details practices that we think may be inadvertent barriers to the hiring, retention, and advancement of qualified individuals with disabilities in state government jobs or lead to violations of the ADA. In many instances, the action necessary to remove a particular barrier will be obvious or may be suggested by some of the best practices outlined in Section I through IV of this report. This section also proposes some possible solutions to several of the potential barriers we have identified.

A. Non-Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity Policies

B. Reasonable Accommodation Policies

Our review of state personnel and reasonable accommodation policies disclosed the following misstatements or omissions concerning the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation, and statements that may be misapplied and result in the inappropriate denial of a reasonable accommodation.

C. Training

Training that contains erroneous, misleading, or ambiguous information can lead agency managers to violate the ADA. States should ensure that training manuals and curricula are carefully checked for legal accuracy. Following are some of the legal inaccuracies we discovered during the course of our review.

1. Training Related to the Hiring Process

2. Training on Reasonable Accommodation

3. Sovereign Immunity


We are encouraged by many of our findings concerning state best practices aimed at recruiting and hiring qualified individuals with disabilities. These practices include not only the establishment of some training and hiring programs specifically for individuals with disabilities, but more significantly, efforts to increase the number of qualified applicants with disabilities for jobs available to the general public. Ultimately, however, very limited data is available concerning the number of individuals with disabilities who applied or were hired for state jobs as a direct result of many of these measures.

Based on information reported by the states, it appears that individuals involved in the hiring process have access to more than adequate training on subjects such as interviewing people with disabilities and preparing job descriptions. The job announcements that we have examined do not describe jobs in a way that would inadvertently screen out qualified individuals with disabilities. In fact, many job announcements and job descriptions specifically reference the availability of reasonable accommodations for the application process and on the job.

The use of written procedures for providing reasonable accommodations, methods of documenting and tracking the disposition of requests, and the provision of appeal processes following denials of reasonable accommodations are also positive trends in some states. States that have not done so may wish to consider the adoption of specific timelines for the provision of reasonable accommodations and use of a centralized funding source for the provision of more costly accommodations. States might also examine whether it is possible to use data concerning the disposition of accommodation requests to revise aspects of their reasonable accommodation procedures.

With respect to ensuring that individuals with disabilities are treated fairly once they are on the job, the states we have surveyed appear to offer significant ongoing training on the ADA and disability issues for managers and supervisors. We are particularly encouraged that training on disability issues is increasingly becoming part of the states' diversity programs. However, we saw little evidence of mentoring programs or training opportunities specifically aimed at promoting the advancement of employees with disabilities after they are hired, or evidence that the states undertake any measures to determine the distribution of employees with disabilities among the various levels of the state government workforce.

Finally, the states we have surveyed have taken a significant number of steps aimed at increasing the employment of people with disabilities generally. We particularly commend states for those efforts initiated by legislative or executive action, as this sends a clear message "from the top" that the employment of people with disabilities is a state priority.

Appendix A

State Number of Employees Personnel Structure for Job Seekers
Florida 130,000 Florida Department of Management Services develops state-wide hiring and employment policies, which provide minimum requirements that all state agencies must follow, although state agencies have some latitude to exceed these requirements.
Kansas 40,570 Each agency establishes its own policies, practices, and procedures, including policies related to reasonable accommodation, with assistance from the state's Division of Personnel Services, Department of Administration where necessary.
Maryland 93,000 Maryland has several different personnel systems, each of which has its own employment policies, practices, and procedures that apply to the agencies under that system.
Missouri 57,596 (12) State Office of Administration, Employee Services Section, is responsible for reviewing job applications for employment within the Missouri Merit System. For jobs outside of the merit system, each state agency handles job openings and hiring. A state web site lists state agencies with direct links to each agency's internet job posting page.
New Hampshire 11,000 Division of Personnel coordinates and posts open recruitment announcements. Applications can be submitted to the Division of Personnel or to the agency that has the vacant position. Interviewing and hiring decisions are made at the agency level.
New Mexico 24,687 Centralized system: State Personnel Office coordinates and posts official position announcements.
Utah 24,000 Large agencies handle own personnel/hiring; smaller state agencies rely on Department of Human Resource Management.
Vermont 8,000 Department of Human Resources develops policies and procedures to govern statewide human resources management practices. Interviewing and hiring decisions are the responsibility of the agency/department hiring official.
Washington 98,500 Department of Personnel developed state-wide policies that individual agencies implement. Washington also included a mix of centralized recruitment for some job classes and individual agency recruitment for others. (Washington is transitioning to a system wherein collective bargaining agreements will establish most personnel policies and procedures.)

Appendix B

For more information on best practices noted in this report, please contact the following individuals:


Julie M. Shaw
Executive ADA Administrator
Governor's Working Group on the ADA
4030 Esplanade Way, Ste 315K
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(850) 487-3423
(877) 232-4968 (TTY)


Anthony A. Fadale
State of Kansas ADA Coordinator
900 SW Jackson, Room 114
Topeka, Kansas 66612
(785) 296-1389
(800) 766-3777 (TTY)


Jade Ann Gingerich
Director of Employment Policy
Maryland Department of Disabilities
217 E. Redwood Avenue, Suite 1301
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 767-3651
(800) 735-2258 (TTY)

Steven D. Serra
Director, Recruitment and Examination Division
Office of Personnel Services and Benefits
Maryland Department of Budget and Management
301 West Preston Street, Suite 608
Baltimore, MD 21201
(410) 767-4917
(800) 735-2258 (TTY)


Robert Honan, Executive Director
Governor's Council on Disability
301 West High Street, Suite 250-A
P. O. Box 1668
Jefferson City, MO 65102-1668
573-751-9326 (voice/TTY)
800-877-8249 (voice/TTY)

New Hampshire

Karen Levchuk
Director of Personnel
25 Capital Street
Concord, NH 03301
(603) 271-3261

Carol A. Nadeau
Executive Director
Governor's Commission on Disability
57 Regional Drive
Concord, NH 03301
(603) 271-6895 (voice/TTY)

New Mexico

Mary Beresford
Director, Governor's Commission on Disability
Lamy Building, Room 117
491 Old Santa Fe Trail
Santa Fe, NM 87501
(505) 476-0412

Greg Trapp
Executive Director
Commission for the Blind
2200 Yale Blvd. SE
Albuquerque, NM 87106
(505) 841-8844
505-243-6407 (TTY)


John W. Golom
Human Resource Manager
Department of Human Services
State of Utah
(801) 538-4229
(801) 538-4371 (TTY)


Karen R. Joeckel
Office of the Commissioner
Vermont Department of Human Resources
110 State Street, Drawer 20
Montpelier, VT 05620-3001
(802) 828-3491


Toby Olson Executive Secretary Washington State Governor's Committee on Disability Issues and Employment P.O. Box 9046 Olympia, WA 98507-9046 (360) 438-3168 (360) 438-3167 (TTY)

1. See

2. 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.

3. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102. Pursuant to statutory directive, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued regulations implementing Title I of the ADA. Those regulations can be found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1630.

4. For information on the New Freedom Initiative, see

5. EEOC publications on the ADA can be found at

6. The ADA considers an individual with a disability "qualified" if he or she can perform a job's "essential functions" (or fundamental duties) with or without reasonable accommodation. See 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8); 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(m).

7. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A); 29 C.F.R. Part 1630, app. § 1630.2(o).

8. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d); 29 C.F.R. § 1630.13.

9. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d)(3)(B), (C), and (4)(C); 29 C.F.R. § 1630.14(b)(1), (c)(1), and (d)(1).

10. Reducing workers' compensation costs also is listed as a goal of the program.

11. In 2001, the President's Committee on the Employment of People with Disabilities became part of the Department of Labor's Office of Disability Employment Policy.

12. Missouri Office of Administration, Division of Personnel, 2004 Annual Report 21 (available at

This page was last modified on November 1, 2005.

Return to Home Page