Transition Service Settings for Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Purpose of This Brief

This brief describes the various settings in which transition services for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities may be delivered, including high school–embedded programs, stand-alone transition programs, college-based programs, cooperative models, and technology-supported services. It examines how differences in transition program location and structure may impact students’ access to inclusive opportunities, community-based instruction, work-based learning, and individualized supports. The brief also identifies key considerations related to transition equity, inclusion, resource allocation, and program design across varied transition service settings.

Key Transition Settings Points:

• Transition services for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are delivered across diverse settings, including high schools, specialized programs, community sites, and college campuses.
• The type and location of services shape student opportunities, with rural and resource-limited areas often facing barriers like long travel distances, limited transportation, and fewer community resources.
• Inclusive practices in schools and communities are associated with improved post-school outcomes, including employment, education, and independent living.
• Work-based learning, pre-employment training, and strong partnerships between schools and community organizations are critical for building real-world skills.
• Effective programs are tailored to individual student needs, local resources, and context.

Introduction

Transition services for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) take place in a variety of settings, each with its own strengths and challenges. These programs are located in urban, suburban, and rural areas with geographic location often influencing the type and intensity of supports and resources available to students, families, and transition educators. Rural transition programs, for example, typically serve far fewer students than programs located in urban and suburban settings. They also tend to be located in areas with far less community infrastructure (e.g., public transportation, large businesses) and with greater distances between student homes and schools and schools and potential work-based learning sites. All too often, this results in students having access to fewer choices for services.

Transition services may be provided in transition program-specific buildings, existing high schools, K–12 schools, or community-based settings (e.g., adult education centers or community and technical colleges). Access to transportation and local resources also varies widely. Urban and suburban programs benefit from closer proximity to public transit and/or school district transportation. Programs in rural settings with limited or no public transportation options often struggle to provide consistent access to community-based experiences, especially when students are placed in individualized worksites spread across a wide geographic area (Test & Fowler, 2018). Transportation challenges are particularly significant for students who do not drive and for those with more intensive support or medical needs. Differences in community settings influence the daily service experiences and opportunities available for the students receiving transition services.

Transition Services Settings

Transition services start with assessment. Transition assessment for students in Minnesota needs to start by the time a student receiving special education services is 14 or in ninth grade (Minnesota Statutes § 125A.08(b)(1) (2024)), while federal law under IDEA requires these services be initiated prior to the time a student turns 16 (34 C.F.R. § 300.320(b). Throughout high school, it is expected that students work with their transition planning team to ensure that they are receiving the instruction and supports that will prepare them for employment and/or post-secondary education.

Transition services can take place in a variety of settings throughout a student’s school tenure. In this summary, we document and review different settings within which transition programs and services are provided in Minnesota and elsewhere and evidence for their efficacy. Specific guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (2025) in regards to where transition services should be provided includes providing the services as close to home as possible, in accordance with the student’s IEP, and requires that transition plans and services are updated annually. Most importantly, the IEP should be individualized to the student’s transition needs and personal transition goals and be the guiding force to the location(s) where services are to be provided (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 2025).

Transition services must be:

• Aligned with the goals and needs identified in the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP); and
• Delivered in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) appropriate for the student (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq, Minnesota Department of Education, 2025).

While the IEP and LRE provide a general guidance as to where transition services are provided, additional factors may also influence the selection of service settings. These can include the availability of community-based experiences, including access to employment or postsecondary education and further training opportunities, student and family preferences, and the extent to which schools or partnering organizations can provide services in inclusive, age-appropriate environments.

Inclusion and Evidence-Based Practices

Inclusion has been identified as an evidence-based predictor that is positively associated with the postschool outcomes of students with disabilities (e.g. Barron et al., 2024; Albano, 2008; Fisher & Meyer, 2002). It refers to a comprehensive approach that supports students with disabilities accessing learning opportunities alongside their peers, at a grade and age-appropriate level both within general education settings and the broader community. In school settings, inclusive practices ensure that students with disabilities have access to the general education curriculum as the first option, supported by appropriate accommodations, individualized instruction, and data-informed decision-making. Research shows that inclusive education is associated with enhanced academic, social, employment, and postschool outcomes of transition aged students with disabilities (Test et al., 2012, Newman et al., 2011).

Within the context of the community, inclusion means structured opportunities incorporating community-based instruction (CBI) to build real-world skills in natural environments. These experiences help students develop practical skills related to independent living, employment, and community participation. By fostering inclusive learning across both school and community settings, schools help students with disabilities be prepared for successful transition (Test et al., 2012).

High-School-Based Transition Programs

Due to the diverse needs of students and the varying resources and contexts of the schools and communities that serve them, transition services are delivered across a variety of educational settings. During the high school years and within a traditional or mainstream high school setting, students may receive individualized transition services coordinated by their case manager or special education team, tailored to individual goals and integrated into their existing school day.

Stand Alone Transition Programs

Some school districts operate separate programs housed in buildings specifically designed for transition-age youth (18–22) to provide a more focused environment that emphasizes life skills, employment, and other post-school needs. In some cases, these transition programs may be located within or affiliated with high school buildings but function as distinct transition programs for those who choose to delay graduation to continue working on transition/IEP goals. This allows young adults to access more intensive, specialized supports while maintaining connections to their broader school environment. Stand-alone transition programs often provide structured opportunities for work-based learning, community-based instruction, and functional living skills training (e.g., cooking, laundry). These programs may provide job coaching with vocational training, travel training, and having partnerships with local businesses or community organizations.

It is important to note, however, that most transition services offered beyond high school occur in segregated settings with limited opportunities for inclusion in typical community or educational environments (National Council On Disability, 2018). While some level of separation may be necessary to provide specialized supports, this reality means that students’ access to inclusive experiences can vary widely across programs. Each of these models includes different strengths and challenges to support successful transitions to adulthood.

College-Based Transition Programs

Campus-based transition programs for students with IDD, including those implemented in partnership with universities and community colleagues, are generally designed to offer more inclusive, community-based experiences that support a variety of postschool outcomes, including employment (Rogan et al., 2014). One such example is the Skills for Independence, Transition, and Employment (SITE) program at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis. This program serves students with IDD aged 18–21, offering them an on-campus experience. Developed in collaboration with Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS), the program supports students during their critical transition period. According to Rogan et al. (2014), the program aimed to create a coordinated system across universities, public schools, and adult service providers to ensure a seamless transition from school to adult life by fostering students’ participation in employment, independent living, and other aspects of community participation. In addition to these outcomes, campus-based programs such as SITE allow students to share space within a more inclusive environment and interact with other young adults their age (18–22), rather than remaining primarily with high school-aged peers. These settings can also support blended coursework, where students take some classes within the transition program and others alongside matriculated college students, promoting career exploration and exposure to postsecondary expectations. When enrolled in college coursework, students may continue to receive supports from their local education agency under IDEA, rather than relying solely on college disability resource services under the ADA, which can provide more comprehensive support. Locating transition programs on college campuses also has the potential to increase student interest in postsecondary education by normalizing participation in college life.

Another example is the UI REACH program at the University of Iowa. This initiative supports students aged 18–25 with ASD and is developed around four core components, including (a) inclusive student life, (b) person-centered planning and academic enrichment, (c) career development and inclusive internships, and (d) post-program support (Hendrickson et al., 2013). The program emphasizes collaboration across students, families, and community partners. In addition to university based programs, transition programs may also be delivered in community or technical college campuses. For example, Neubert and Redd (2008) describe a Transition Program (TrP) where students ages 18-21 received transition services in a community colleague setting. In this model, students participated in a combination of campus based activities, community based instruction, and employment experiences while continuing to receive supports from special education staff. This example shows how college based environments can be used to support students with disabilities age appropriate and community based transition experiences.

While programs such as UI REACH highlight the promise of campus-based transition models, there are also challenges to consider. In many regions, particularly rural areas, community and technical colleges and universities are less numerous than high schools, which may require students to travel greater distances to participate. Additionally, neurotypical college students may not always respond positively to transition programs located on their campuses, and transition-age youth may experience social exclusion unless intentional strategies are implemented to promote meaningful inclusion. Hendrickson et al. (2013) indicate the ongoing need for continued development to support the long-term success and sustainability of such programs and research.

Cooperative and Collaborative Transition Models

In many rural and extended suburban areas of the country school districts collaborate to provide transition services and programs. Such transition collaboratives are intended to allow for the use of limited resources in a more efficient manner as well as expand the opportunities offered to students with disabilities (USDOE, 2023). Utilizing this approach, schools can share specialized staff (e.g., transition coordinators, job coaches), pool funding to support work-based learning or community-based instruction, and provide access to a wider array of supports and transition partners (e.g. Sauber & Rhodes, 1998; Ruppar et al., 2024). This model may be particularly beneficial for smaller or rural districts that may not have the capacity to independently offer comprehensive transition services.

Cooperative models have the potential to facilitate interagency collaboration and improve continuity of services across geographic boundaries. Potential drawbacks to this approach arise when there are conflicts between the individual districts in the cooperative regarding priorities and use of resources or when one district possesses a set of resources (e.g., businesses that offer to support work based learning experiences for students) that others do not and must subsequently limit access to within district students. Moreover, transportation barriers can make full use of the opportunities available in the cooperative difficult for some students and a challenge for the cooperative. Research on the effectiveness of cooperative models in improving the transition outcomes of students with disabilities is limited and context-dependent. Available evidence suggests that positive outcomes are more likely when cooperative agreements are well-implemented and successful in achieving their intended goals (Castruita Rios, Park, Chen, & Tansey, 2023). Limited evidence exists relating specifically to cooperative models between school districts. However, studies on collaborative and inter-district partnerships indicate that success is more likely when agreements include clear shared goals, strong coordination and leadership, streamlined resources and services, and strong communication between partners, monitoring, and data-informed decision-making (Magee & Plottner, 2022; Poirier, et al, 2022; Test et al., 2020).

Technology-Supported Transition Services

Technology-supported transition services represent a unique setting in which transition services and educational experiences may be delivered using simulated environments. These include the use of both virtual (VR) and augmented (AR) reality programming. Potential benefits of this setting include the opportunity to practice skills in more controlled environments and tailoring the environment to provide enhanced skill development in areas the student may have the strongest need. During training within these simulated environments, student reactions (e.g., anxiety, stress, attention) can be monitored to a wide variety of situations. Additionally, an almost limitless number of scenarios can be developed for students to use to refine their skills, and users are provided with immediate feedback following each use of the system.

The PAES (Practical Assessment Exploration System) lab is one example of a simulated environment and specifically intended for transition students and meant to “mimic real workplace settings (paesauthor.com/about-paes ). However, little empirical evidence supports the effectiveness of the program in terms of leading to student employment outcomes. The studies cited on the program’s website are limited in scope, somewhat outdated, and primarily support its use as an assessment tool rather than as an intervention to improve transition-to-employment skills.

In addition to a lack of empirical support for the use of many commercially available simulated instructional systems, there are a number of other concerns that have been voiced in relation to VR/AR training programs. These concerns focus on (a) the generalizability of both the environment and the skills learned in the simulated environment; (b) the overuse of virtual reality-based entertainment that many transition-age youth experience; and (c) the hardware and software costs associated with making such systems available to a large number of students (Llanos-Ruiz, Abella-García, & Ausín-Villaverde, 2025).

Despite the limited evidence of efficacy in education, the use of technology as part of transition interventions is rapidly expanding, offering a variety of methods for teaching employment and pre-employment skills. Among these, VR job simulations have emerged as a promising tool, enabling students to explore different job and career environments while practicing both general skills (e.g., interviewing; Smith et al., 2014; Ward & Esposito, 2019) and specific job tasks in a safe, controlled setting. McDonald and colleagues (2025) identified several technology-based approaches with potential for supporting Pre-ETS and related employment preparation, and they also noted the growing promise of artificial intelligence for developing these skills.

Conclusions

Transition services for students with IDD are delivered across a range of settings, each with distinct strengths and challenges. These settings vary in their ability to provide inclusive opportunities, individualized supports, access to community based instruction, and work-based learning opportunities. While adapting to local context is important, it is critical that transition services remain centered on students’ goals and preferences. Districts should routinely assess student, school, and community needs to understand available transition service settings and guide effective resource allocation to enhance those settings in ways that best support students’ transition needs. Ongoing attention to equity, resource distribution, and quality inclusive opportunities is needed to support meaningful transition supports for all students.

Recommendations and Considerations

1. Assessing the needs and goals of the students in the district can help provide guidance on the settings where transition services can/should occur.
2. Establish a process for ongoing assessment and monitoring of community resources, including the availability and quality of work-based learning opportunities.
3. Transition services occur across multiple settings based on the needs of the students and where services can be connected to the needs of students. Considerations must also be given to the distance between student homes, services and community sites.
4. Work based learning experiences are important for students to gain employment experience related to their interests as well as increasing opportunities to practice and refine skills supportive of successful post-secondary outcomes (e.g., communication, conflict resolution, responsibility, promptness, professionalism) .
5. In rural and resource-limited contexts, assess feasibility given local and geographical constraints. Consider high-impact activities, carefully developed regional collaborations, or virtual approaches to increase equitable access to services.
6. Flexible models of transition services need to be developed and evaluated. These models need to be aligned with the resources and opportunities available in the variety of communities who support youth and young adults with IDD in this age group .
7. Cooperative agreements should be carefully considered based on the needs, goals, and desired outcomes for all organizations involved, and their effectiveness should be regularly reevaluated.

References

Suggested Citation:

Kramme, J., Lee, S., Roberts, M., & Ticha, R. (2026). Research Brief 1: Transition Service Settings for Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. University of Minnesota, Institute on Community Integration.