Policy Research Brief, Vol. 31, No. 2

policy research brief, institute on community integration, university of minnesota

Research Issue

Assistive technology products assist people in their daily activities. Examples include text-to-speech software for communication, software used for tran-sition planning, and virtual reality (VR) to learn job and interview skills.

Individuals with intellectual and developmental dis-abilities (IDD) can use technology to improve autonomy, independence, self-determination, and quality of life in education, employment, community inclusion, and self-determination (Friedman, 2023).

Some children with IDD use technology-based sup-ports in school as part of their Individualized Educa-tion Plans. Upon graduation, they may have trouble funding the technology they learned to use in school. Adults with IDD may struggle to identify and pay for the technology they need. Government-funded assis-tance for technology can be difficult to qualify for and arrange. Lack of affordable technology can hinder access and limit the utility and impact of technology for individuals with IDD and their families (Khanlou et al., 2020).

Study Background

The Family & Individual Needs for Disability Supports (FINDS) 2023 survey asked about the experiences of 3,113 caregivers of individuals with IDD in the United States. The study was conducted by the Research and Training Center on Community Living at the Institute on Community Integration in collaboration with The Arc. We used 2023 FINDS data to examine technology access, utility, and unmet needs for people with IDD.

Access: extent to which technology-based support is available and easy to use.

Unmet needs: extent to which technology supports are not available.

Policy Recommendations

Help students transitioning from school to plan how they will meet their technology needs after graduation.
Fund needed technology for people who are waiting for long-term supports and services.
Share information about organizations that provide technology resources and support.
Encourage states to invest in Technology First solutions for people with IDD.
Ensure equitable access to technology resources for individuals from diverse cultural communities and those with fewer economic resources.

Key Findings

Older individuals with IDD (ages 55-65) had less technology access. People who were school age had greater access to technology.

This visual is a bar graph showing the percentage of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities reported to use technology across different life activities. The activities include “has access to broadband”, “attend school”, “homework or school activities”, “stay connected”, “make choices in their personal lives”, “take part in community activities”, find or apply for a job”, “find or choose community supports”, “perform their job”, and “get where they need to go”. Percentages of individuals are broken up by age, including “21 and under”, “22-54”, and “55 and older”. Eighty-eight percent of people 21 and under, eighty-nine percent of people ages 22-54, and sixty-eight percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to have access to broadband. Ninety-two percent of people 21 and under, seventy-five percent of people ages 22-54, and thirty-seven percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for attending school. Eighty-six percent of people 21 and under, sixty-nine percent of people ages 22-54, and twenty-eight percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for homework or school activities. Eighty-five percent of people 21 and under, eighty-seven percent of people ages 22-54, and seventy-three percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for staying connected. Seventy-five percent of people 21 and under, seventy-seven percent of people ages 22-54, and fifty-five percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for making choices in their personal life. Seventy-four percent of people 21 and under, seventy-six percent of people ages 22-54, and fifty-five percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for taking part in community activities. Seventy-two percent of people 21 and under, seventy-three percent of people ages 22-54, and thirty-nine percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for finding or applying for a job. Sixty-five percent of people 21 and under, sixty-eight percent of people ages 22-54, and forty-three percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for finding or choosing community supports. Sixty-three percent of people 21 and under, fifty-eight percent of people ages 22-54, and thirty-one percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for performing their job. Finally, sixty-one percent of people 21 and under, sixty-two percent of people ages 22-54, and fifty-four percent of people ages 55 and older were reported to use technology for getting where they need to go.

People with IDD waiting for government funding for more than 10 years had less technology access and more unmet technology needs.

This visual is a bar graph showing the percentage of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities reported as either being on a waiting list for government-funded supports who do and do not have at least one unmet technology need, as well as the percentage of individuals who are not on a waiting list who do and do not have at least one unmet technology need. Of the individuals reported as being on a waiting list for government-funded services, fifty percent have at least one unmet technology need and fifty percent do not have any reported unmet needs. Of the individuals reported as not being on a waiting list for government-funded services, fifty-eight percent (58.5% specifically) have at least one unmet technology need and forty-one percent (41.2% specifically) do not have any reported unmet needs.

People with IDD waiting for government funding were more likely to have at least one unmet technology need.

Policy Forum

The Policy Forum is a bi-monthly web-based presentation and facilitated discussion exploring research published in the most recent Policy Research Brief. Please visit the website for details and to view previous forums.

Subscribe to Policy Research Brief and Policy Forum

Published October 2024

Guest editors: Emily Unholz-Bowden and Oichao Pan

Editor-in-chief: Julie Bershadsky

Graphic design: Connie Burkhart

Policy Research Brief: z.umn.edu/rtcprb

Research cited:

Lahti Anderson, L., & Pettingell, S. (2023). Family and individual needs for disability supports community report 2023. University of Minnesota, Research and Training Center on Community Living, Institute on Community Integration.

Friedman, C. (2023a). Assistive technology for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the United States in home- and community-based services. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2023.2272849

Khanlou, N., Khan, A., Vazquez, L. M., & Zangeneh, M. (2021). Digital literacy, access to technology and inclusion for young adults with developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 33(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-020-09738-w

Development of this PRB was supported by Cooperative Agreement #90DNPA0001-01 and Grant #90RT5019 from the Administration on Community Living to the University of Minnesota. Points of view do not necessarily represent official ACL policy.

Download a 2-page PDF of this issue of Policy Research Brief

The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. This document is available in alternative formats upon request.

The Institute on Community Integration (ICI), collectively acknowledges that Minnesota is located on the traditional, ancestral, and contemporary lands of the Anishinaabe, Chippewa, Ojibwe, Dakota, Cheyenne, and other Native peoples. This land holds great historical, spiritual, and personal significance for its original stewards, the Native nations and peoples of this region. We affirm tribal sovereignty and will work to hold ourselves and affiliations accountable to American Indian peoples and Nations.

Ongoing oppression and discrimination in the United States has led to significant trauma for many people of color, immigrants, people with disabilities, and other oppressed persons. At ICI, we affirm our commitment to address systemic racism, ableism, and all other inequalities and forms of oppression to ensure inclusive communities.