Summary of Performance (SOP) Annotated Bibliography

(Prepared for NSTTAC by Dr. Sharon Richter, Appalachian State University)

The 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) requires that “a public agency must provide the child with a summary of the child’s academic achievement and functional performance, which shall include recommendations on how to assist the child in meeting the child’s postsecondary goals…when a child graduates with a regular diploma or exceeds the age eligibility under State law” [300.305 (e) (3)]. Despite the recent directive, federal mandates do not include instructions regarding completion of SOPs for transitioning students with disabilities. Additionally, states are entitled to interpret federal laws individually and design procedures to meet the minimum requirements accordingly, resulting in inconsistency across the field in terms of information included in SOPs. Consequently, several professional organizations [e.g., Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD), Council for Exceptional Children’s Division on Career Development and Transition (DCDT)] as well as collaborative groups of researchers have provided suggestions for developing SOPs.

Setting standards for developing SOPs is critical as this document now serves as the link between high school and post-secondary experiences. Therefore, the SOP is the primary resource by which post-secondary agencies determine eligibility for services and accommodations for students with disabilities. The purpose of this brief summary is to provide special education professionals and researchers with guidelines and suggestions for completing SOPs to facilitate students’ successful transition to post-secondary life.

Banerjee, M., & Shaw, S. (2007). High-stakes test accommodations. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 171-180.

• Indicates that SOPs may not provide sufficient information for students to substantiate eligibility for accommodations on high-stakes tests in post-secondary settings.
• Discriminates between accommodations eligibility under IDEA and ADA.
• Provides a side-by side comparison of documentation needed for accommodation eligibility by the Educational Testing Service and the College Board.
• Recommends several considerations for testing agencies determining eligibility for accommodations based on disability, including: (a) multiple sources of information, (b) cross validation of disability across evidences, (c) statements about prior success with specific accommodations, and (d) information about prior performance with and without accommodations.

Bowen, S., & Rude, H. (2006). Assessment and students with disabilities: Issues and challenges with educational reform. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 25(3), 24-30.

• Indicates that a SOP should include a description of students’ academic, cognitive, and functional skills in the last year of high school.

Consider these areas when preparing document. (2006, May). Special Education Report.

• Recommends that individuals preparing SOPs consider several pieces of information including an employability profile; career plan; career and technical education achievement profile; transcripts; functional behavior assessments; adaptive behavior assessments; psychological assessments; strength-based assessments; information from the student, family, school and adult service personnel; details of students’ prior successful use of accommodations, modifications and assistive technology devices; descriptions of students’ strengths and potential post-secondary needs; and information of previous interagency collaboration.

Cortiella, C. (2007). Summary of performance: A new tool for successful transitions. Exceptional Parent, 37(11), 97-97.

• Presents information about the SOP requirements in IDEA (2004) in simple language for parents of students with disabilities.

Dukes, L., Shaw, S., & Madaus, J. (2007). How to compete a summary of performance for students exiting to postsecondary education. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 143-159.

• Reviews the SOP requirements and described the five sections of the Nationally Ratified Summary of Performance template
  • The five sections include: (a) background information, (b) student’s post-secondary goals, (c) summary of academic, cognitive, and functional skills, (d) recommendations to facilitate student’s attainment of post-secondary goals, and (e) student input.
• Provides an example of a completed SOP for James, an 18-year-old student with LD.

Field, S., & Hoffman, A. (2007). Self-Determination in secondary transition assessment. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 181-190.

• States accurate SOPs are a result of student participation in development of the document.
• Indicates that SOPs must include statements of SD skills, as self-determination is an integral part of functional performance.
• Suggests several strategies and resources for transition assessment, including: reviewing background information; conducting interviews; and gaining other assessment information from standardized instruments, curriculum-based assessments, performance samples, situational assessments, and other behavioral observation techniques.

Furth, S. (2007). Transitioning students with disabilities into college. International Educator, 22(2), 31.

• Recommends that students with disabilities who have been accepted to college contact the university disability services office and bring their SOP to the disability services office on campus before classes begin.
• Indicates colleges and universities generally require evaluation data; information about the impact of the disability; and statements about student history with assistive technology devices, accommodations, and services.
• Indicates that students’ SOPs should include background information, post-secondary goals, a summary of student performance, recommendation for accommodations and other supports likely to be essential to students with disabilities in post-secondary settings, and a statement of student perspective of the impact of the disability and previous supports.

Gormley, S. (2007). Packing for college: What the student with LD shouldn't bother packing. Insights on Learning Disabilities, 4, 51-64.

• Indicates that students with learning disabilities who plan to request accommodations from a college of university need the following data: (a) from a recent standard norm-referenced psycho-educational evaluation that was conducted by a qualified professional, (b) that substantiates the impact of the disability on a “major life activity” (p. 53), and (c) that indicates the benefits that students experienced as a result of specific accommodations.
• Suggests a SOP template and instructions from the National Transition Documentation Summit.

Izzo, M., & Kochhar-Bryant, C. (2006). Implementing the SOP for effective transition: Two case studies. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 29, 100-107.

• Presents two case studies and example SOPs for two students exiting high school, including a student with a specific learning disability transitioning to college and a student with a cognitive disability transitioning to supported employment.

Kochhar-Bryant, C. (2007). The summary of performance as transition passport to employment and independent living. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 160-170.

• Presents the SOP as a “Transition Passport” that can facilitate transition from school to adult life for students with significant cognitive disabilities.
• Describes the five parts of the SOP including (a) background information, (b) post-secondary goals, (c) a summary of student performance, (d) recommendation for accommodations and other supports likely to be essential to students with disabilities in post-secondary settings, and (e) student input.
• Identifies information needed by Vocational Rehabilitation for individuals to receive services, including (a) initial disability identification with date of diagnosis, (b) how disability diagnosis was made, (c) qualifications of the individual making the determination, (d) the impact of the disability on individual’s life, and (e) the impact of the disability on individual’s academic and functional abilities.
• Names several types of assessments to gather information about a student.
• Provides a completed SOP for Carlos, a 20-year-old student with autism and significant intellectual disabilities.

Kochhar-Bryant, C., & Izzo, M. (2006). Access to post-high school services: Transition assessment and the summary of performance. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 29, 70-89.

• Presents SOP as a document that aligns the requirements of IDEA (2004) with those of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
• Provides guidelines that may helpful to states and districts as they develop their own SOP procedures.
• Describes benefits of the SOP as a transition planning tool are the improvements in the following areas: (a) students’ self-determination skills via participation in the SOP process, (b) students’ ability to address challenges of post-secondary access to supports, (c) interagency collaboration with Vocational Rehabilitation, (d) students’ knowledge of financial aid resources and procedures, (e) students’ access to technology, and (f) students’ preparation for the policies of various institutions (e.g., universities, community colleges).
• States that faculty at institutions of higher education may be better able to serve students with disabilities with an SOP, given the comprehensive information included in the document. Finally, authors provide general guidelines for completing a SOP and the SOP template developed by the National Transition Documentation Summit and guidelines specific to SOPs for a student with LD who will attend a university in post-secondary life.

Know when to supply SOPs. (2007). Special Education Report.

• Briefly presents SOP from the perspective of Melinda Baird, a special education attorney in TN.
• Indicates that SOPs must summarize academic achievement and functional performance and make recommendations to facilitate students’ successful attainment of post-secondary goals.

Lamb, P. (2007). Implications of the summary of performance for vocational rehabilitation counselors. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30, 3-12.

• Indicates that in order to address information required by Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) to verify an individual’s disability status SOPs should include the following information: (a) initial disability identification with date of diagnosis, (b) manner in which disability status was decided, (c) qualifications of the individual making the determination, (d) the impact of the disability on individual’s life, (e) the impact of the disability on individual’s academic and functional abilities.
• Suggests specific skill areas to address in SOPs include academics, socialization, independent living skills, career, and self-determination.
• Recommends collaboration between professionals in special education, VR, and institutions of higher education.

Leconte, P. (2006). The evolution of career, vocational, and transition assessment: Implications for the summary of performance. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 29, 114-124.

• Suggests that transition assessment information should include traditional assessment categories related to learning styles, career interests, and academic performance but also consider additional areas, including: (a) community and civic participation, (b) post-secondary education, (c) vocational training, (d) recreation and leisure, (e) personal management, (f) employment, (g) daily living and independent living, (h) transportation and mobility, (i) interpersonal skills and social relationships, (j) health, (k) wellness, and (l) medical matters.
• Presents a list of 11 components that should be included in SOPs.

Madaus, J., Bigaj, S., Chafouleas, S., & Simonsen, B. (2006). What key information can be included in a comprehensive summary of performance? Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 29, 90-99.

• Makes suggestions for each section of a SOP
  • Part I, Demographic Information, include the student’s initial disability diagnosis and reports from most recent informal and formal evaluations.
  • Part 2, Student Post-secondary Goals, should include the post-secondary goals in the IEP that meet the standards of IDEA (2004).
  • Part 3, students’ Present Level of Educational Performance and Essential Accommodations, Modifications, and Assistive Technology should include the following areas: (a) academics (i.e., reading, math, and written language), (b) cognitive skills (i.e., general ability and problem solving, attention, and executive functioning), and (c) functional skills (i.e., social skills and behavior; independent living skills; environmental access and mobility; self-determination and self-advocacy; and career, vocational, and transition considerations).
• Indicates that the SOP may be a tool for improving students’ self-determination skills

Madaus, J., & Shaw, S. (2006a). Disability services in postsecondary education: Impact of IDEA 2004. Journal of Developmental Education, 30, 12-21.

• Describes key changes to IDEA (2004) that have implications for transition-aged students, including less stringent procedures for triennial reviews, SOP requirements, increase of age for initial transition services from 14 (IDEA, 1997) to 16 per IDEA (2004), and eligibility criteria for students with LD.
• Indicates that post-secondary institutions will likely use the information in the SOP to make decisions related to the (a) students’ status as a person with a disability, (b) effect of the disability on the student’s life, and (c) supports that students have effectively used in the past.

Madaus, J., & Shaw, S. (2006b). The impact of the IDEA 2004 on transition to college for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21, 273-281.

• Reviews changes to IDEA (2004) including LD diagnosis, transition services, and the SOP requirements.
• Presents implications for transition-aged students.
• Indicates that the SOP requirements can bridge a gap between high school and post-secondary education because the document provides a broad description of students’ strengths and needs.

Madaus, J., & Shaw, S. (2007). Transition assessment. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 130-132.

• Discusses changes to federal transition mandates including exit documentation as well as implications for service eligibility in post-secondary settings.
• Indicates that vague federal guidelines regarding Summary of Performance results in varied interpretations of requirements across states.
• Provides an overview of six articles included in a special issue in Assessment for Effective Intervention related to Summary of Performance.

Martin, J., Van Dycke, J., D'Ottavio, M., & Nickerson, K. (2007). The student-directed summary of performance: Increasing student and family involvement in the transition planning process. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30, 13-26.

• Describes the Student-Directed Summary of Performance (SD-SOP) procedure by which students work collaboratively with families and special education professionals to create a resource that includes evaluation information, accommodations, and post-secondary goals.
• Describes benefits to students including increased student participation in the transition planning process and improved self-determination skills.
• Appendix A includes (a) instructions and definitions for completing the SD-SOP, (b) a student cover letter to send to the adult service providers with the SD-SOP, and (c) a blank SD-SOP template.
• Appendices B and C present the SOP worksheet form a public school district and SOP IEP page.

Shaw, S. (2006). Legal and policy perspectives on transition assessment and documentation. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 29, 108-113.

• Reviews the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; 2004) in terms of its implications for transition assessment and documentation.
• Includes the IDEA definition of Summary of Performance.
• Indicates that SOPs may be helpful for students with disabilities because the document could describe not only students’ abilities, but also identify supports that were effective during high school.
• States that IDEA is ambiguous in terms of recommended procedures for summarizing students’ academic and functional abilities.

Sitlington, P., & Clark, G. (2007). The transition assessment process and IDEIA 2004. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(3), 133-142.

• Indicates that IDEA (2004) includes a focus on transition assessment.
• Suggests several strategies and resources for transition assessment, including: reviewing background information; conducting interviews; and gaining other assessment information from standardized instruments, curriculum-based assessments, performance samples, situational assessments, and other behavioral observation techniques.
• Provides recommendations for assessing environments in which the students will live, work and learn after high school and involving a variety of stakeholders in the assessment process.
• Presents the SOP as a convenient document in which to present assessment information at graduation and during major milestones in a student’s school career.

Summary of performance' should be relevant, useful. (2006). Special Education Report.

• Indicates that the SOP should be developed by the IEP team, including the student, family, special education and general education teachers, school psychologist, and related service personnel.
• Includes hyperlink to an e-learning course, Life Beyond Grade 12: Transition Planning for Students with Disabilities, at www.shoplrp.com/product/p-300305.html