Work is an important part of life, providing both economic security and a forum to contribute one's talents and skills to society, thereby anchoring the individual in a social role. However, access to work is not equally available to people with disabilities globally. Regulatory environments that prohibit discrimination and support vocational training and educational opportunities constitute a critical first step toward economic independence. However, they have not proven sufficient in themselves. In this article, we aim to infuse deeper consideration of employer practice and demand-side policy reforms into global policy discussions of the right to work for people with disabilities. We begin by documenting the employment and economic disparities existing for people with disabilities globally, followed by a description of the international, regional, and local regulatory contexts aiming to improve labor market outcomes for people with disabilities. Next, we examine how policies can leverage employer interests to further address inequalities. We discuss employer policies and practices demonstrated in the research to facilitate recruitment, hiring, career development, retention, and meaningful workplace inclusion. The goal of the article is to synthesize existing international literature on employment rights for people with disabilities with the employer perspective.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Interagency collaboration is one of the most highly recommended practices in transition to adulthood for youth with disabilities, but it is also one of the least empirically understood. Recent literature cites the need to clarify collaboration as a construct, and focus on collaborative practices and processes to supplement research on antecedents and outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This exploratory, mixed methods research looks to highlight collaborative practices and processes in NYS PROMISE, a statewide project aiming to improve outcomes for youth with disabilities who receive Supplemental Security Income. The project used interagency agreements to specify required service coordination processes, communications, information sharing, professional development, and cross-training. METHODS: The mixed methods approach combines three studies. In Study 1, the Levels of Collaboration Survey (LCS, Frey et al., 2006) provided data on regional network changes over time. In Study 2, an organizational attitudes and experiences (OAE) survey measured satisfaction of partner communications. In Study 3, qualitative analysis of biannual on-site interviews helped contextualize the characteristics of partnerships that project staff found effective. RESULTS: In a descriptive sense, the LCS showed increases in regional cohesion, peaking in the project's penultimate year. Changes were statistically significant in at least one region. OAE responses showed regional increases in satisfaction with partner communications. Qualitative analysis indicated that characteristics of partnerships described as effective included: (a) joint objectives and clearly defined roles; (b) extensive sharing of information and resources; and (c) frequent communication (formal and informal). Staff turnover, inadequate organizational capacity, and partners not executing key functions were described as barriers to productive collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Feedback from project staff provides clarification of the experiences of agency staff coordinating services, and helps refine certain constructs and assumptions common in collaboration research about transition. The authors discuss implications for future research and the development of sustainable systems of interagency collaboration in the field of transition.

No abstract