This article addresses the issue of availability of competitive employment for individuals with significant disabilities compared to segregated day and work services. Despite the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Supreme Court decision in the Olmstead v. L. C. (1999) case and its emphasis on full community integration for individuals with significant disabilities, and the blending of individualized support strategies with the philosophy of self-determination in the 1990s, the majority of individuals with significant disabilities currently are not working in competitive employment. In addition, the measures used to define quality supported employment outcomes and programs frequently lack clarity. In this article, the authors briefly discuss the underlying values that should be used to guide all competitive employment programs designed to support individuals with disabilities. Second, they detail benchmark indicators through which the quality of supported employment programs should be measured. The article concludes with a description of the importance of using quality indicators in assessing the validity of supported employment services, particularly in the current environment of strained and finite fiscal resources.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albin, J.M., Rhodes, L., & Mank, D. (1994). Realigning organizational culture, resources, and community roles: Changeover to community employment. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 105—115.
2.
American Association on Mental Retardation. ( 2002). Mental retardation: Definition, classification and systems of support. Washington, DC: Author .
3.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.
4.
Bond, G.B., Becker, D.R., Drake, R.E., Rapp, C.A., Meisler, N., Lehman, A.F., et al. (2001). Implementing supported employment as an evidenced-based practice. Psychiatric Services, 52, 313—322.
5.
Braddock, D., Hemp, R., Parish, S., & Rizzolo, M. (2002). The state of the states in developmental disabilities: 2002 study summary. Boulder: University of Colorado, Coleman Institute for Cognitive Disabilities and Department of Psychiatry.
6.
Brooke, V., Inge, K. , Armstrong, A., & Wehman, P. (Eds.). (1997). Supported employment handbook: A customer-driven approach for persons with significant disabilities. Richmond: Virginia Commonwealth University, Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Workplace Supports.
7.
Brooke, V., Wehman, P., Inge, K., & Parent, W. (1995, December). Toward a customer-driven approach of supported employment. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 308— 320.
8.
Browder, D., Wood, W., Test, D., Karvonen, M., & Algozzine, B. (2001). Reviewing resources on self-determination: A map for teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 233—244.
9.
Egan, K. (2001). Staffing companies opening new doors to people with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation16, 93—96.
10.
Gilson, S.F. (1998). Choice and self-advocacy: A consumer's perspective . In P. Wehman & J. Kregel (Eds.), More than a job: Securing satisfying careers for people with disabilities (pp. 3—24). Baltimore: Brookes.
11.
Green, H., & Brooke, V. (2001). Greater success through new partnerships: The business connection. In P. Wehman (Ed.), Supported employment in business: Expanding the capacity of workers with disabilities (pp. 23—34). St. Augustine, FL: Training Resource Network.
12.
Hayden, M., & Albery, B. (Eds.). (1994). Challenges for a service system in transition. Baltimore: Brookes.
13.
Inge, K. (1997). Job site training. In V. Brooke, K. Inge, A. Armstrong, & P. Wehman (Eds.), Supported employment handbook: A customer-driven approach for persons with significant disabilities (pp. 159—204). Richmond: Virginia Commonwealth University, Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Workplace Supports.
14.
Legal Information Institute. (2002). Olmstead v. L. C. [Online]. Available: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-536.ZS.html
15.
Mank, D. (1994). The underachievement of supported employment: A call for reinvestment. Journal of DisabilityPolicy Studies , 5(2), 1—24.
16.
Mank, D., Cioffi, A., & Yovanoff, P. (1999). Impact of coworker involvement with supported employees on wage and integration outcomes. Mental Retardation , 37, 383—394.
17.
Mank, D., Cioffi, A., & Yovanoff, P. (2000). Direct support in supported employment and its relation to job typicalness, coworker involvement, and employment outcomes . Mental Retardation, 38, 506—516.
18.
Murphy, S.T., Rogan, P.M., Handley, M., Kincaid, C., & Royce-Davis, J. (2002). People's situations and perspectives eight years after workshop conversion. Mental Retardation, 40, 30—40.
19.
Olmstead v. L. C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999).
20.
Parent, W., Wehman, P., & Bricout, J. (2001). Supported employment and natural supports. In P. Wehman (Ed.), Supported employment in business: Expanding the capacity of workers with disabilities (pp. 93—114). St. Augustine, FL: Training Resource Network.
21.
Peck, B., & Kirkbride, L.T. (2001). Why businesses don't employ people with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation , 16, 71—75.
22.
Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.
23.
Ridgway, P., & Rap, C. (1998). The active ingredients in achieving competitive employment for people with psychiatric disabilities: A research synthesis . Lawrence: University of Kansas , School of Welfare.
24.
Stancliffe, R.J., & Lakin, K.C. (1999). A longitudinal comparison of day program services and outcomes of people who left institutions and those who stayed. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps , 24, 44—57.
25.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, Final Rule, 62 Fed. Reg. 6311 (Feb. 11, 1997)(codified at 34 C.F.R. § 361).
26.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, Final Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 4382—4389 (Jan. 17, 2001) (codified at 34 C.F.R. § 361).
27.
State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, Final Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 7249—7258 (Jan. 22, 2001) (codified at 34 C.F.R. § 361).
28.
Ticket to Work and Work Incentive Improvement Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1305 et seq. (1999).
29.
Wehman, P. (1981). Competitive employment: New horizons for severely disabled individuals. Baltimore: Brookes.
30.
Wehman, P. (1993). The ADA mandate for social change. Baltimore: Brookes.
31.
Wehman, P. (2001). Supported employment in business: Expanding the capacity of workers with disabilities. St. Augustine, FL : Training Resource Network.
32.
Wehman P., & Kregel, J. (1995). Supported employment: At the crossroads. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 286—299.
33.
Wehman, P., Revell, W.G., & Kregel, J. (1998). Supported employment: A decade of rapid growth and impact. American Rehabilitation, 24(1), 31— 43.
34.
Wehmeyer, M.L., & Lawrence, M. (1995). Whose future is it anyway? Promoting student involvement in transition planning. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 18, 68—84.
35.
West, M., Hill, J., Revell, G., Smith, G., Kregel, J., & Campbell, L. (2002). Medicaid HCB Waivers and supported employment: Pre- and post-Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Mental Retardation , 40(2).
36.
West, M., Johnson, A., Cone, A., Hernandez, A., & Revell, G. (1998). Extended employment support: Analysis of implementation and funding issues. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33, 357—366.
37.
West, M., Wehman, P., & Revell, G. (2002). Extended services in supported employment: What are providers doing? Are customers satisfied? In D. Dean, P. Wehman, & J. Kregel (Eds.), Achievements and challenges in employment services for people with significant disabilities: A longitudinal impact of workplace supports (pp. 85—98). Richmond: Virginia Commonwealth University, Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Workplace Supports.
38.
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 93 (1998).
