Mainstreaming Effective Employment Support for Individuals with Health Conditions: An Analytical Framework for the Effective Design of Modified Individual Placement and Support (IPS) Models

Abstract

Individual Placement and Support (IPS) is a highly effective model of employment support for individuals with severe mental health conditions. Its potential modification for new settings and larger cohorts is of keen interest across advanced economies given shared health-related (un)employment challenges. Despite mushrooming policy interest and activity around modified IPS a significant barrier and risk at present is the absence of a well-considered analytical framework to enable structured critical reflection about the effective translation of IPS principles and fidelity into modified IPS services. This article fills this void through the presentation for the first time in the literature of such an analytical framework, unpacking as it does so a set of key original analytical distinctions that are unhelpfully homogenised in current literature and policy thinking and highlighting the wider potential of IPS principles and models to the nature of good employment support for other individuals with health conditions and disabilities.

Economic analyses of supported employment programmes for people with mental health conditions: A systematic review

“…Another barrier is the lack of sustainability. SE/IPS programmes as alternatives to traditional vocational rehabilitation services may not have secure mainstream funding [ 63 , 64 ].…”

“…More economic evaluations as part of naturalistic implementation studies, as well as studies determining the economic value of augmenting SE/IPS with additional measures such as psychological therapies, or looking at approaches that are more or less targeted to specific populations, would help inform policy and practice. For example, in the UK, one ongoing evaluation explores whether IPS will reach and support more people with mental health needs, if it is part of primary health services rather than linked to specialist mental health services [ 64 ]. We also found no studies directly comparing cost-effectiveness by severity of illness or dual diagnosis, or studies on high-risk populations including refugees or those with adverse childhood experiences.…”

“…Another barrier is the lack of sustainability. SE/IPS programmes as alternatives to traditional vocational rehabilitation services may not have secure mainstream funding [63,64]. Overcoming these challenges requires more intersectoral collaborations between health and welfare sectors.…”

A critical exploration of university policy supporting the employment and career development of people with disability in the Australian academy

“…This challenge is potentially redressed through the Integrated Placement and Support (IPS) approach to disability employment. Whitworth (2019, p. 518) explains that under this model, employment against ‘well matched jobs’ is the objective, where support is provided by employment specialists who have manageable caseloads and who are incorporated within mental health teams. This individualised approach that appreciates the importance of matching job roles with personal skills might help to see more DES clients establishing their professional careers in the academy.…”

‘Working With the Whole Person’: Employability Keyworker Experiences of Supporting People Furthest From the Labour Market

“…Drawing on in-depth interviews with thirteen employability keyworkers, we enhance the emergent body of literature exploring frontline employability specialists' views and practices (Henry and Lucca, 2004;Barnes et al, 2017;Johnson et al, 2021;Bakkeli, 2022;McDowell et al, 2022). We build on themes of recent publications in this journal (Danneris and Caswell, 2019;Kampen and Tonkens, 2019;Lindsay et al, 2019;Whitworth, 2019;Ravn and Bregaard, 2021), which have explored the 'ingredients of success' (Danneris and Caswell, 2019) in what supports vulnerable jobseekers into employment or education. However, in taking a detailed focus on the lived experience of employability practitioners, our analysis surfaces both strengths and challenges inherent in more person-centred approaches to employment support.…”