Policy shifts over the past 20 years have created an agenda that calls for a sustained commitment to integrated employment for individuals with disabilities. But despite these clear intentions, unemployment of individuals with disabilities continues to be a major public policy issue.
Improving employment outcomes has been identified as a priority by self-advocates, states agencies, the National Governor’s Association, and federal policy makers. The recognition of the pivotal role that work can play in the lives of people with IDD is driving many state developmental disabilities agencies to adopt “Employment First” policies that prioritize employment in integrated settings as the preferred day
The growing emphasis on government accountability at the state and federal levels has increased interest in the collection and use of outcome data. Moreover, research has found that high performing states in integrated employment generally have a clear and visible data collection system that includes individual outcome data (Hall, Butterworth, Winsor, Gilmore, & Metzel, 2007). But what are the most important elements in designing and using a system?
Little is known about the factors that shape the employment-related decisions of individuals with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities (ID/DD). This article presents findings from qualitative interviews with individuals with ID/DD, their family members and employment-support professionals from four Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs) throughout Massachusetts. Recognizing the value of participatory action research, this study also included a co-researcher with ID/DD who participated in all facets of the research process.
Individual control over service delivery and life choices is well established as a value in supports for individuals with developmental disabilities. One policy-based strategy for expanding individual control is the use of mechanisms that provide for consumer direction of funding resources.
The data represented here describe the core elements of ICI’s National Survey of Day and Employment Services. Integrated employment includes both individual employment and group supported employment and facility-based settings include both facility-based work services and facility-based non-work services.
This is the first in a series of Research to Practice briefs based on the FY2002-2003 National Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs) funded by the Administration on Developmental Disabilities. This brief presents findings on people with developmental disabilities in employment services and characteristics of the community rehabilitation organizations that provide those services.
In 2002 and 2003, the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI) conducted a national survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs) that was funded by the Administration on Developmental Disabilities. The goal was to identify major trends in employment and non-work services for people with developmental disabilities. Since CRPs are key partners in implementing disability-related employment policy, including TWWIIA and WIA, researchers were interested in the extent to which organizations participated in these initiatives.
The proportion of individuals participating in non-work programs has grown noticeably over the past decade. Despite the push toward integrated employment for people with developmental disabilities in many states, non-work day programs continue to be a substantial component of the service mix. Butterworth et al.
Washington stakeholders report that the state’s focus on employment started in the late 1970s with values-based training based on the Program Analysis of Social Services (PASS-3) model.These workshops were widely attended over several years, and many of today’s key players in state and county services participated as leaders. One of the outcomes of this period was the first edition of the County Guidelines, a document that guided county and