Skip to main content
Log in

Factors influencing state progress in the implementation of Public Law 99-457, Part H

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Policy implementation has been an infrequently studied process although it has become increasingly evident that the implementation processes of policy development, policy approval, and policy application can shape and delay prospective implementation of legislation. The current study analyzes the implementation of P.L. 99–457 (Part H) the Education for the Handicapped Amendments of 1986. This law provides the states with planning money from the federal government to design a comprehensive interagency, multidisciplinary program of services for children with handicapping conditions and their families. Ratings were taken from key administrators and citizens knowledgeable about the law on state progress in implementing the fourteen requirements of the law and also on proposed influential conditions that might affect that implementation. Additional demographic information was obtained for the fifty states. The factor that seemed to be most influential in a subset of 35 states was the prior presence in the state of systems for interagency planning and development. Neither prior history of early childhood services, available resources, wealth of the state, or geographic region appeared to have a significant influence on policy development. There was some indication that different factors might become influential in the next phase of implementation, policy approval. It appears that progress in state policy development may be linked to the special requirements of the legislation itself and to prior availability of institutional structures that make mandated collaborative efforts more possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albritton, R. and R. Brown (1986). ‘Intergovernmental Impacts on Policy Variations within States: Effects of Local Discretion on General Assistance Programs.’ Policy Studies Review 5 (3): 529–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1990). ‘Policy implications of Socio-Economies.’ Policy Studies Review 9 (3): 445–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aufderheide, J. (1976). ‘Educational Interest Groups and the State Legislature,’ in R. Campbell and T. Mazzoni, eds. State Policy Making for the Public Schools. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 176–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardach, E. (1977). The Implementation Game: What Happens after a Bill Becomes a Law. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berke, J. and M. Kirst, eds. (1972). Federal Aid to Education: Who Benefits? Who Governs? Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, C. (1980). ‘The Office for Civil Rights and Implementation of Desegregation Programs in the Public Schools.’ Policy Studies Journal 8 (4): 596–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R. and T. Mazzoni (1976). State Policy Making for the Public Schools. Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, P., S. Walsh and P. McKenna (1988). ‘First Year Implementation of the Federal Program for Infants and Toddlers with Handicaps: A Review from the States.’ Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 8 (3).

  • Children's Defense Fund (1989). The Health of America's Children: Maternal and Child Health Data Book. Washington, DC.

  • Comfort, L. (1982). Education Policy and Evaluation: A Context for Change. New York: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L. and J. Algina (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derthick, M. (1972). New Towns in Town: Why a Federal Program Failed. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, G. (1980). Implementing Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elazar, D. (1966). American Federalism: A View From the States. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. (1980). ‘Backward Mapping: Implementation Research and Policy Decisions.’ Political Science Quarterly 94: 601–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. (1981). ‘Models for Policy Analysis: Child and Family Policy,’ in R. Haskins and J. J. Gallagher, eds. Models for Analysis of Policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, pp. 37–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. and G. Harbin (1988). A Scale to Measure Progress in the Implementation of P.L. 99–457, Part H. Unpublished instrument. Carolina Policy Studies Program, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J., G. Harbin, D. Thomas, R. Clifford and M. Wenger (1988). Major Policy Issues in Implementing Part H- P.L. 99–457 (Infants and Toddlers). UNC at Chapel Hill: Carolina Policy Studies Program, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, S. and G. Horton (1975). Integration of Human Services: The State and Municipal Levels. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, G. (1981). ‘Block Grants and State Discretion: A Study of the Implementation of the Partnership for Health Act in Three States.’ Policy Sciences 13:155–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbin, G. (1989). Assessment of Influential Characteristics: Policy Development and Implementation of P.L. 99–457. Part H. Unpublished Instrument. Carolina Policy Studies Program, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbin, G., J. Gallagher and T. Lillie (1989). State's Progress Related to 14 Components of P.L. 99–457. Part H. UNC at Chapel Hill: Carolina Policy Studies Program, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbin, G. and B. McMulty (1989). ‘Policy Implementation: Perspectives on Service Coordination and Interagency Cooperation,’ in S. Meisels and J. Shonkoff, eds. Handbook of Early Childhood Interventions. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargrove, E. C. (1975). The Missing Link: The Study of Implementation of Social Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. and R. O'Conner (1979). ‘Interagency Limitations on Policy Implementation.’ Administration and Society 11: 193–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, C., D. Mitchell and F. Wirt (1986). ‘The Context of State-Level Policy Formation.’ Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 8 (4): 347–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, L. and M. McLaughlin (1982). ‘The States Commitment to Special Needs Students,’ in J. D. Sherman, M. A. Kutner and K. J. Small, eds. New Dimensions of the Federal-State Partnership in Education, pp. 63–82.

  • McLaughlin, M. (1982). ‘State Involvement in Education Quality Issues,’ in J. Sherman, M. Kutner and K. Small, eds. New Dimensions of the Federal-State Partnership in Education. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Education Leadership, pp. 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M. (1987). ‘Learning from Experience: Lessons from Policy Implementation.’ Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 9 (2), 171–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNulty, B. (1989). ‘Leadership and Policy Strategies for Interagency Planning: Meeting the Early Childhood Mandate,’ in J. Gallagher, P. Trohanis and R. Clifford, eds. Policy Implementation and P.L. 99–457: Planning for Young Children with Special Needs. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, pp. 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meisels, S. (1985). ‘A Functional Analysis of the Evolution of Public Policy for Handicapped Young Children.’ Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 7:115–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meisels, S., G. Harbin, K. Modigliani and K. Olsen (1988). ‘Formulating Optimal State Early Childhood Intervention Policies.’ Exceptional Children 55 (2): 159–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (1981a). Shaping Legislative Decisions: Education Policy and the Social Sciences. Lexington, MA: Lexington.

  • Mitchell, D. (1981b). ‘Social Sciences Utilization in State Legislatures.’ Review of Research in Education vol. 9.

  • Murphy, J. (1973). ‘Title V of ESEA: The Impact of Discretionary Funds on State Education Bureaucracies.’ Harvard Educational Review 43 (3): 362–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, R. and D. Pinderhughes, (1980). ‘Changing Anacostia: Definition and Implementation.’ Policy Studies Journal 8 (7): 1089–1101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressman, J. and A. Wildavsky (1984). Implementation (3rd Ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, N. (1980). ‘Statutory Structure and Policy Implementation: The Case of Wetlands Regulation.’ Policy Studies Journal 8 (4): 575–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. and D. Mazmanian (1979). ‘The Conditions of Effective Implementation: A Guide to Accomplishing Policy Objectives.’ Policy Analysis 5(4): 481–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • State Policy Data Book (1988). McConnellsburg, PA: Brizius and Foster.

  • Van Horn, C. and D. van Meter (1977). ‘The Implementation of Intergovernmental Policy,’ in S. Nagel, ed. Policy Studies Review Annual, Vol. 1, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, W. (1971). Social Policy Research and Analysis: The Experience of Federal Social Agencies. New York: American Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, W. (1980). Government by Agency. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirt, F. and M. Kirst (1975). Political and Social Foundations of Education. Berkeley, CA:

  • McCutchan.Wirt, F. and M, Kirst (1982). Schools in Conflict: The Politics of Education. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harbin, G., Gallagher, J.J., Lillie, T. et al. Factors influencing state progress in the implementation of Public Law 99-457, Part H. Policy Sci 25, 103–115 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00233743

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00233743

Keywords

Navigation