Customized employment for transition-age youth in state vocational rehabilitation program PY2017 - PY2020: Analysis of service outcomes and related factors

Article type: Research Article

Authors: Kim, Jaeyoung^{a; *} | Park, Sara^b | Castruita-Rios, Yazmin^a | Weathers, Marcus^b | Park, Mirang^c | Inge, Katherine^d | Riesen, Tim^e | Keeton, Beth^f | Avellone, Lauren^d | Tansey, Timothy^b

Affiliations: [a] Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA | [b] Department of Rehabilitation Psychology and Special Education, University of Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, WI, USA | [c] Department of Rehabilitation Counseling, Kosin University, Busan, South Korea | [d] Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (VCU-RRTC), Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA | [e] Institute for Disability Research, Policy & Practice, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA | [f] Griffin-Hammis Associates, Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA

Correspondence: [*] Address for correspondence: Jaeyoung Kim, Michigan State University, 620 Farm Lane, Erickson Hall, Room 459, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. E-mail: kimjaey4@msu.edu.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Customized employment (CE) is positively correlated with competitive integrated employment (CIE) outcomes and potentially supports transition-age youth in achieving sustainable employment. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the employment outcomes and related factors for transition-age youth with disabilities who received CE services through state vocational rehabilitation agencies (SVRAs) and their vendors from program year 2017 to 2020. METHODS: Employing a combination of descriptive analysis, binary logistic and multiple regression, chi-square tests, and t-tests, the study investigates the demographics, potential barriers, and vocational rehabilitation (VR) services received by the research sample using the RSA-911 dataset. RESULTS: The sample comprised 672 individuals with a mean age of 22.30 years. The most prevalent barrier to employment among CE participants was long-term unemployment, while Supplemental Security Income (SSI) was the most common social security benefit. Furthermore, only 13.2% of transition-age youth achieved CIE status, compared to 30.1% of adults. The key predictors of employment outcomes, including CIE status, weekly earnings, and working hours were identified. CONCLUSION: The research reveals significant differences in employment outcomes between transition-age youth and adult VR consumers. These insights emphasize the necessity for SVRAs to consider a range of factors, including demographics, potential employment barriers, and the effects of various VR services, to increase the CE service effectiveness for transition-age youth.

Keywords: Customized employment, transition-age youth, vocational rehabilitation, competitive integrated employment, individuals with significant disabilities

DOI: 10.3233/JVR-240013

Journal: Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, vol. Pre-press, no. Pre-press, pp. 1-17, 2024