New autism numbers released Thursday suggest more U.S. children are being diagnosed with the developmental condition and at younger ages.

In an analysis of 2018 data from nearly a dozen states, researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that among 8-year-olds, 1 in 44 had been diagnosed with autism. That rate compares with 1 in 54 identified with autism in 2016.

U.S. autism numbers have been on the rise for several years, but experts believe that reflects more awareness and wider availability of services to treat the condition rather than a true increase in the number of affected children.

A separate CDC report released Thursday said that children were 50% more likely to be diagnosed with autism by age 4 in 2018 than in 2014.

“There is some progress being made and the earlier kids get identified, the earlier they can access services that they might need to improve their developmental outcome,” said CDC researcher and co-author Kelly Shaw.

Geraldine Dawson, director of Duke University’s Center for Autism and Brain Development, said

A new Missouri law allowing employers to continue paying some people with disabilities less than minimum wage has positioned the state at the forefront of a national debate over disability rights in the workplace.

Part of a wide-ranging piece of legislation signed by Gov. Mike Parson in July, the rule directs the state to develop its own version of a federal program that allows wages as low as pennies per hour.

Roughly 5,000 employees work at facilities with subminimum wage certificates in Missouri – called sheltered workshops because workers are kept separate from others. Missouri has the second-highest number of sheltered workshops in the country, with 95 operating locations.

Though the New Deal-era law that governs such employment was considered progressive when it was enacted, it has come under increasing criticism in recent years.

On one side of the debate are employers – along with many workers with disabilities and their families – who say the point of sheltered workshops isn’t pay, but rather the community and

The U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut has handed down one of the largest fines ever — $5 million — in a housing discrimination case against the town of Cromwell.

The suit involved Cromwell’s attempts to shut down a group home for people with mental health disabilities. Cromwell was found in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.

The October ruling upheld existing precedent; the amount awarded in damages is what sets the case apart.

“It’s such an incredible message to get from a jury. And one that hopefully sends a message out to others, too: ‘You can’t do this. This is behavior that will be punished,’” said Tara Ramchandin, an attorney for Gilead Community Services.

Gilead is a nonprofit organization that provides support to individuals with mental health disabilities, including residential group homes like the one in Cromwell.

The Sonoma Developmental Center (SDC) holds a special place in the minds of residents of Sonoma Valley. We like to think it is unique — extraordinary —because of its legacy of caring, its iconic architecture, and its pivotal role in the community as an employer and institution.

It’s not. As far as the state of California is concerned, the SDC is just another DC to shut down and dispose of, part of a decades-long movement away from institutionalizing the developmentally disabled in favor of embedding them in community homes.

But the Eldridge site does have some exceptional features compared with other developmental centers. A wildlife corridor runs through it, and its future will be shaped by a much-touted, never-been-done-before, community-driven specific planning process.

How will this process change what ultimately happens to the SDC? It’s impossible to know as yet, but one way to consider both the process and the outcome is to take a look at what happened to the other developmental centers after their closures.

Closure of all of California’s developmental centers emanates from what’s commonly called the Lanterman Act, legislation dating back to the 1960s (and revised over the years) that essentially ended the “involuntary detention of all but the most gravely mentally ill.” The bill and its amendments remain controversial: Critics charge that the act has caused an increase in homelessness and jeopardized the well-being of former clients; proponents maintain it has integrated the developmentally disabled more deeply into local communities and reduced the costs of care. Regardless of the pros and cons, closures of the centers have profoundly impacted the developmentally disabled and their families.

The closures have also had major impacts on the communities that surround them. Large tracts of land and expansive campuses, many with historic status, have essentially “gone on the market” as real estate transactions for California’s Department of General Services (DGS), the state’s self-proclaimed “business manager.” Protocol dictates DGS first offer these properties to other state entities, such as universities. If such a transfer is not forthcoming, the property is put up for sale, with the goal of making the best deal possible.