Suzzanne Freeze

As states focus on expanding integrated employment opportunities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and phase out sheltered work, they are finding a need to concurrently examine day services and supports that promote Community Life Engagement (CLE, see yellow box to the right for a detailed definition). These supports can be a wrap-around to ensure individuals’ engagement in the community is maintained and they continue to receive sufficient levels of support, despite fluctuations in job status and hours.

Download article here. In an ever-evolving landscape, states are working to achieve new levels of integrated employment outcomes. While state have been building supports for more than five decades to meet the needs of their constituents, a different playing field has emerged in recent years. This is a result of new regulations, requests from advocates and families, shifting expectations and fluctuating state budgets.

Download article here. In an ever-evolving landscape, states are working to achieve new levels of integrated employment outcomes. While state have been building supports for more than five decades to meet the needs of their constituents, a different playing field has emerged in recent years. This is a result of new regulations, requests from advocates and families, shifting expectations and fluctuating state budgets.

The Early Start to Supported Employment (ESSE) pilot started in 2005 with the goal of providing a more seamless transition for students who would benefit from supported employment services when leaving school and entering the adult workforce. An interagency project team was established to guide the pilot work and ensure all required parties knew their role and shared information and equal responsibility within the project.

Oklahoma’s Developmental Disabilities Services Division (DDSD) realized the need for increased attention towards the goal of community-based employment for individuals they served. Initially, rates were based on a vendor’s costs of providing direct services such as job development and job coaching. It became increasingly apparent that claims for vocational services oftentimes reflected staff activities (e.g., job development, client assessment, and service delivery documentation), which may have been occurring without the direct involvement of the service recipient.

As state developmental disability service systems strive to balance myriad challenges, the inevitable question of funding must be addressed. Through State Employment Leadership Network (SELN) events, member states have regularly expressed the need for additional analysis and insights related to rates, reimbursement, and funding issues. This series of Funding Summaries is intended to shed light on the complexities as well as successes experienced by state systems across the country.