Closures are the tip of the iceberg: Exploring the variation in state vocational rehabilitation program exits after service receipt

Abstract

Despite the important role that state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies play in promoting employment for people with disabilities, little is known about how their exits after service receipt vary with individual characteristics and across states compared to the general population with disabilities. We used fiscal year 2007 RSA administrative data and American Community Survey public use files to calculate the ratio of the number of individuals exiting VR after service receipt to the estimated number of working-age people with disabilities in 2007 at the national and state levels and the ratios for demographic, educational, and disability subgroups. Our results show that 1.3 of every 100 working-age adults with a disability in the household population exited a VR agency after receiving services, with state variation ranging from 0.6 percent in Washington and Puerto Rico to 4.0 percent in Vermont. We also found large differences across subgroups -differences that are much larger in some states than in others. These disparities raise questions about why some groups are more likely to complete VR services than others and whether VR agencies should systematically target more resources to certain groups. Further research is needed to better understand how well people with disabilities complete VR agency services.

Individual, agency, and state economic characteristics

“…Chan and colleagues (2016), found that gender (favoring males) was a significant predictor of a successful closure. This finding has also been supported in previous research indicating that male closure rates outnumbered female closure rates by 17% (Stapleton et al, 2010). However, Dutta and colleagues (2008) found gender to be an insignificant variable when investigating the closure patterns of VR agencies.…”

“…Even with the over 60% of competitive employment rates achieved by individuals with disabilities who receive VR services, research is still limited regarding the factors that impact the closure rates between VR agencies across the 50 states. Previous research has shown that state VR agencies differ in their reported closure rates for successful job placements (Stapleton, Honeycutt, & Schechter, 2010). However, there is scant literature about what may be contributing to these variations in closure rates.…”

“…Patterns of services differ vastly among agencies especially across various demographic groups and geographical regions, and these service patterns have been shown to contribute to variation in competitive employment outcomes (Stapleton et al, 2010). There may be some factors that contribute to low competitive employment rates that are not within an agency's control.…”

“…Currently, there are agency disparities between agencies among different variables, such as services provided and overall employment outcomes of individuals who utilize these services (Stapleton et al, 2010). Investigating the different factors between low-performing and highperforming agencies will provide more insight into what may be impeding agency performance and can facilitate changes in VR process and policy to increase competitive employment placements for all agencies and especially for low-performing agencies.…”

“…Each agency may differ in the implementation of services, types of services provided and who receives these services (Chan et al, 2016). Previous research has explored some of these differences, primarily studying how individual characteristics impact closure rates and employment (Dutta, Gervey, Chan, Chou, & Ditchman, 2008;Sevak, Houtenville, Brucker, & O'Neill, 2015;Stapleton et al, 2010).…”