Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Including Group Quarters Residents With Household Residents Can Change What We Know About Working-Age People With Disabilities

Stapleton, David C.; Honeycutt, Todd; Schechter, Bruce

doi:10.1007/s13524-011-0071-y

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the rate of institutionalization changed substantially over the study period, it could bias our estimation of changes over time. Fortunately this does not appear to be the case because the changes in institutionalization due to disability have been modest and the proportion of the target population at ages 45–64 in institutions is low (She and Stapleton 2006, Stapleton, Honeycutt and Schechter 2012). An additional limitation pertains to the cross-sectional nature of the data, which precludes examining causal effects of the hypothesized precursors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the increasing disability prevalence among mid-life US adults, 2002 to 2016

Zajacova

Montez

2018

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several recent studies have documented an alarming upward trend in disability and functional limitations among US adults. In this study, we draw on the sociomedical Disablement Process framework to produce up-to-date estimates of the trends and identify key social and medical precursors of the trends. Using data on US adults aged 45-64 in the 2002-2016 National Health Interview Surveys, we estimate parametric and semiparametric models of disability and functional limitations as a function of interview time. We also determine the impact of socioeconomic resources, health behaviors, and health conditions on the trends. Our results show increasing prevalence of disability and functional limitations. These trends reflect the net result of complex countervailing forces, some associated with increases in functioning problems (unfavorable trends in economic well-being, especially income, and psychological distress) while other factors have suppressed the growth of functioning problems (favorable trends in educational attainment and some health behaviors, such as smoking and alcohol use). The results underscore that disability prevention must expand beyond medical interventions to include fundamental social factors and be focused on preventing or delaying the onset of chronic health problems and functional limitations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the increasing disability prevalence among mid-life US adults, 2002 to 2016

Zajacova

Montez

2018

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We use the integrated public use microdata files (Ruggles et al, 2010) of the ACS, pooled across 2009 to 2011 to ensure adequate sample sizes by type of disability and demographic characteristics. We exclude individuals living in group quarters because research has found this population to be systematically different from the population of people with disabilities living in the community (Stapleton, Honeycutt, & Schechter, 2012). We also limit our analysis to individuals aged 25 to 64 years to focus on the working-age population.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Characteristics and the Disability Employment Gap

Sevak

Houtenville

Brucker

et al. 2015

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although people with disabilities have poorer employment outcomes, on average, than do people without disabilities, some of them fare relatively well in the labor market. To learn more about the individual characteristics associated with positive employment outcomes among people with disabilities, we use data from the 2009-2011 American Community Survey to examine differences in employment outcomes by demographic and other individual characteristics in a multivariable framework. Controlling for all other individual characteristics, we find the employment gap between individuals with and without disabilities is smaller among those in their 20s and 60s relative to the middle aged, Asians relative to Whites, Hispanics relative to non-Hispanics, married individuals, individuals with higher levels of educational attainment, and women. Overall, results suggest that policies and practices designed to improve employment outcomes among people with disabilities should consider how individual characteristics interact with disability as challenges to or facilitators of employment success.

show abstract

“…When employment services are provided, they are most often provided as “late interventions.” SSA, for example, focuses its employment support efforts on its existing DI and SSI beneficiaries, with very limited success in moving beneficiaries back to work (Liu & Stapleton, 2011). Other research has suggested that few people with disabilities without jobs are actively looking for work (Erickson & Lee, 2008) and that only a small number participate in public vocational rehabilitation services that are designed to increase participation in the labor market (Stapleton, Honeycutt, & Schechter, 2008).…”

Section: Literature Review and Overview Of Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation in Safety-Net Programs and the Utilization of Employment Services Among Working-Age Persons With Disabilities

Houtenville

Brucker

2013

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive analysis of the 2009 Current Population Survey-Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS-ASEC) provides the first snapshot of the involvement of people with disabilities in a broad array of government programs. Focusing on the working-age population, this analysis reveals that people with disabilities represent one third of the persons who participate in safety-net programs. Among persons with disabilities, 65% participate in a safety-net program, compared with 17% of persons without disabilities. Among Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) beneficiaries, 38% participate in safety-net programs other than DI, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, and Medicare. Furthermore, results suggest that only 3% and 8% of low-income nonworking safety-net participants with and without disabilities, respectively, utilize employment services. Improved data collection on the use of employment services is needed to further evaluate the interaction of safety-net and employment services programs.

show abstract

Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Including Group Quarters Residents With Household Residents Can Change What We Know About Working-Age People With Disabilities

Abstract: A d v a n c i n g t h e W o r l d o f W o r kM A Y 2 0 0 9 iii ABSTRACTInformation about residents of institutional and noninstitutional group quarters (GQ),

Cited by 14 publications

References 8 publications

Explaining the increasing disability prevalence among mid-life US adults, 2002 to 2016

Explaining the increasing disability prevalence among mid-life US adults, 2002 to 2016

Individual Characteristics and the Disability Employment Gap

Participation in Safety-Net Programs and the Utilization of Employment Services Among Working-Age Persons With Disabilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About