Services Received by Persons Accepted Into the Program services received by VR clients. For example, it should be possible, without unduly burdening counselors, to routinely collect a more detailed profile on each client of the cost, intensity, and frequency of specific services provided, purchased, or arranged for by the VR agency. Alternatively, RSA could conduct periodic studies of client samples, although the multiple disabilities and service types in the VR program would make this approach technically complex. Second, we recommend that RSA further examine the specific issue of racial disparities in spending. This can be done in at least two ways. RSA could make use of existing data to shed light on this problem. For example, the data from the Client Assistance Program (which exists to assist clients who have complaints during the VR process) might be useful for determining whether conflicts that exist between clients and the VR agency are related to the racial or ethnic group membership of the client. Alternatively, evaluations could be designed to include this issue. Thus, RSA could ensure that provision is made for the collection of generalizable data on the experiences of clients who are members of minority groups in the current longitudinal evaluation study, and could focus on the issue in future evaluation contracts. Such a focus may well require over-sampling members of minority groups, or designing additional data collection instruments for measuring processes related to minority issues in vocational rehabilitation. Chapter 5 Employment and Earnings Outcomes The fourth and final evaluation question asked us to describe the results 'For example, RSA reported that for the group of clients (without severe disabilities) rehabilitated in 2Berkeley Planning Associates, Use of the Social Security Data-Link for Assessing the Impact of the Employment and Earnings Outcomes Organization of the examine program impact for clients who differed in type and severity of disability. (Chapter 1 contains a more detailed description of the data and our methods of analysis.) Briefly, those applicants who were rehabilitated worked more and earned more than their group did before VR, and the trends were better than those for non-rehabilitants (partial participants) and dropouts. On the other hand, the rise in the proportion of those with earnings in any year was short-lived (lasting only 2 years after closure), and subsequent earnings gains for the shrinking fraction working were modest. Using statistical methods to control for some pre-existing differences between the groups, we found the rehabilitants' work level and earnings higher at the 5-year point after VR than those for the other two groups. This chapter presents details of our findings in three sections, with results in each given separately for clients with physical disabilities, emotional disabilities (including mental illness or substance abuse), and mental retardation.3 In the first section, we examine short-term economic outcomes, using RSA data alone to show clients' status at the time of closure. In the second section, we examine three indicators of long-term economic outcomes, covering 8 years after case closure-how many worked, how continuously they worked, and what they earned. In this section, we also present the results of more detailed statistical analyses of the effect of the program, taking account of differences among the groups other than their VR experience. In the third section, we assess the program's effect on long-term outcomes separately for those with severe and non-severe disabilities. Short-Term Outcomes The state agency records one of three outcomes for clients accepted into the VR program. Clients may (1) drop out before a service plan is developed or before services are initiated, (2) receive some services but not be rehabilitated, or (3) be rehabilitated. Clients are classified as rehabilitated if they are engaged in an occupation commensurate with their abilities for 60 days after the provision of VR services. Approximately 70 percent of clients with physical disabilities (including visual, hearing, and orthopedic impairments, amputations, and chronic 3In the previous chapter, we found that clients with different types of disabilities received VR services that varied in type and cost. We also expected that these client groups would face different barriers to employment. Thus, we analyzed outcomes for these groups separately also; aggregate analysis of all clients in the data base would not reveal any differences by disability. Figure 5.1: Short-Term Outcomes of the VR Program Employment and Earnings Outcomes illnesses) and clients with mental retardation were rehabilitated in 1980. About half the clients with emotional disabilities (those due to substance abuse or mental illness) were rehabilitated. Roughly 10 percent in each of the three disability groups dropped out of the program. The remaining clients received some services but were not rehabilitated. The results, presented by disability group, are contained in figure 5.1. Employment and Earnings Outcomes disabilities), become homemakers (RSA recognizes achieving greater independence at home as an acceptable rehabilitation outcome for some clients), or are engaged in self-employed or unpaid work. As can be seen in table 5.1, a majority of clients who were rehabilitated found work in the competitive labor market. However, a substantial percentage of clients with mental retardation were placed in sheltered employment. Also, across all three disability groups, men were more likely than women to find competitive employment. A greater proportion of women than men were rehabilitated as homemakers, a pattern that was especially pronounced among clients with physical disabilities. |