This instrument assesses an individual’s experiences in paid employment as well as their experiences searching for paid employment. The target population for this instrument is adults with disabilities who receive HCBS or HCBS-like services. This is a self-contained instrument that can be administered independently of other RTCOM instruments.
The instrument is administered through an in-person or video-conferencing interview where an interviewer guides an individual through a series of questions (i.e., items). The responses for each item are scored on a Likert scale. The available research supports measure administration every four to six months.
Measure Specs
General Information
Over the last decade, policy shifts have placed increased attention on integrated employment of people with disabilities. As a society, we have moved from sheltered workshops and day activity centers to supported employment, and most recently through the application of approaches to customized employment, to competitive integrated work opportunities for people with even the most intensive support needed, Yet despite a variety of policies, directives, and legislation, people with disabilities continue to experience limited participation in the labor market. (Almalky, 2020; Butterworth, et al, 2015a; Miethlich & Oldenburg, 2019). Recent estimate indicate that in the US, only one in three (34.9%) individuals with disabilities are employed compared to 76% of their counterparts without disabilities, and this disparity appears to be increasing over time (Bonaccio, et al 2020; Houtenville & Ruiz, 2012; Kraus,2017; Lauer & Houtenville, 2017).
Individuals with disabilities face challenges to employment beyond that experienced by their peers without disabilities. Not only are they less likely to be employed when they desire to be so (Andara et al, 2024) but the quality of their employment is significantly lower than their counterparts. Persons with disabilities consistently report lower levels employment quality than their counterparts without disabilities and are nearly twice as likely to report low-quality employment in the form of employment in which they feel trapped) or is insecure and unrewarding . This gap in employment quality is particularly pronounced for those who reported living with both a physical and mental/cognitive condition (Shahadi, et al, 2023). Given the relative stagnation that has occurred in disability employment over the past two decades, the emphasis in many states and among support providers is on raising overall employment rates. This, however, overlooks the problem that not all jobs are of equal quality, and some jobs offer few of the assumed benefits of paid employment Burgard & Lin, 2013; Burroway, 2017). Therefore, although participation in paid employment is an objective with the potential to support social and economic well-being, the long-term goal should be high-quality employment (Martin Ginis, et al, 2020; Tompa et al, 2022).
Specific external barriers to employment for individuals with disabilities that have been identified include a lack of job opportunities (Grant, 2008), insufficient supports to maintain employment (Shier, et al., 2009), and discrimination and stigmatization in the workplace (Winn & Hay, 2009). Individuals with mental health issues face similar difficulties finding and retaining employment, with an added burden of unique stigmatization due to perception of mental health and safety and when persons with disabilities do have jobs they tend to be underemployed (Stuart, 2006).
Beyond the financial benefits of the employment of people with disabilities, access to inclusive high quality employment that pays a living wage has been shown to be a key determinant of individual health and quality of life outcomes (Dean et al., 2018; Emerson et al., 2018; Randall et al., 2022; Robertson et al., 2019; Voermans et al., 2020), as well as being economically and socially beneficial for employers, communities, and broader society (Cimera, 2010; Taylor, et al., 2021).
Existing employment measures developed for use with people with disabilities typically assess a limited number of aspects of one’s work including rates of employment, type of employment, hours worked, and weekly or monthly earnings (Cimera & Burgess, 2011; Grigal, Hart, & Migliore, 2011). When considering the well-being of people with disabilities, earnings and hours worked are key outcome variables. However, this data only inform one about limited aspects of an individual’s employment experience (Nord, et al., 2013; Martin Ginis, et al, 2020; Migliorie et al., 2012; Tompa et al, 2022) and leave out a wide variety of outcomes strongly associated with both the quality of employment and the quality of life one leads. Second, only a few existing employment measures include items that solicit information about how effectively the provider system supports an individual’s employment. Just as important, few currently available instruments have demonstrated adequate reliability and validity and across different disability populations. A third limitation is that current measures do not account for the outcomes experienced by a large segment of the disability population, who although they desire to work, are not currently employed. Providers therefore have little information about the people they serve who are in the process of applying for work but have yet to be able to find employment or are in the process of applying for a new job. The submitted RTCOM employment measure concepts attempt to fill this gap in HCBS measurement.
The rationale for inclusion of a set of employment performance measures was based on:
(a) A systematic review of the disability employment research literature
(b) Use of a variety of approaches, including a participatory planning and decision-making process employed at a national level, to determine the extent to which stakeholders believed performance scores based on various components of the job experiences construct were important to include in the measure under development
(c) Input from several technical expert panels, and
(d) An examination of gaps or limitation inherent in current approaches to measuring outcomes and service quality in this area.
The Quality of Job Experiences and Experiences Seeking Employment measures developed as part of the Research and Training Center on HCBS Outcome Measurement (RTC/OM) were designed to target employment outcomes of people with disabilities at the agency level and be sufficiently sensitive to changes in policy and services that performance scores could be used to document improvement in quality of both services and HCBS recipient outcomes. This level of measurement needs to be more granular than that which is used to focus on compliance and requires measures able to demonstrate reliability, validity, accuracy, and sensitivity at the agency level with the specific groups of HCBS recipient organizations’ serve. The measure is constructed to be person-centered, taking into consideration personal preferences with respect to how one goes about a search for employment, the extent to which they desire support in applying for a job, and for those who work, the level and types of support they need on the job, the quality of interactions they have with co-workers and the general public, the number of hours worked, the extent to which these hours meet their needs, the degree to which person is looking for advancement in their employment, the types/forms of both supervision and job support they prefer as well as from whom, and the specific roles they serve for their employer.
These measure characteristics are necessary in order to ensure the provision of actionable data so that provider agencies can determine the effectiveness with which they are supporting individuals with disabilities to obtain employment, and not just survive in their jobs but thrive in them. Fortunately, the existing research base clearly indicates that people with intellectual and physical disabilities, autism, mental health challenges and TBI can all be matched to job positions in which they can be successful (Gustafsson, et al, 2013; Henry, et al 2019; Houtenville & Kalargyrou, 2012; Khayatzadeh-Mahani, et al 2020 Nevala et al, 2019; Suijkerbuijk, et al 2017) and a variety of approaches to support the employment of people with disabilities are now approaching or have met the criteria for consideration as evidenced-based or promising practices including supported (Wehman, 2023; Wehman et al, 2018) and customized (Inge, et al, 2018; Riesen et al, 2023) approaches to employment. As mentioned previously, however, it should be noted that employment quality is just as important an outcome to consider as the number of people with disabilities who are employed.
Information/data available based on performance scores on our two employment measures have the potential to provide support agencies with a variety of information that can be used to (a) document overall service quality and facilitate policy and/or programmatic changes needed as part of agency quality improvement efforts, (b) identify specific aspects of the Job Experiences subdomain where performance is less than desirable as well as those areas in which the agency is supporting exceptional outcomes, (c) longitudinally track changes that occur in service quality and job experiences, and provide families and persons with disabilities with information they can use to help make informed decisions as to which employment support agencies they desire to provide services to their family member with a disability.
(A complete reference list is provided as a supplemental attachment in section 7.1.)
N/A
Public Comments