Are Individuals With Severe Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Cost-Efficient to Serve Via Supported Employment Programs?

Abstract

The relations between cost-efficiency (from the perspective of worker, taxpayer, and society) and personal characteristics of supported employees (i.e., IQ, level of mental retardation, multiple disabilities, gender, ethnicity, and age) were examined. Results suggest that when sheltered workshops were used as alternative placements, supported employees with high IQs benefited more from employment within the community than did supported employees with lower IQs. From society's perspective, African American and male supported employees were more cost-efficient than were European American and female supported employees. Further, regardless of the severity or number of disabilities, all individuals were cost-efficient from each perspective (i.e., worker, taxpayer, and society) and time period (i.e., 1990, 1994, and projected lifelong).

The Cumulative Cost-Effectiveness of Supported and Sheltered Employees with Mental Retardation

“…That is, they might have produced a greater net benefit to taxpayers than supported employment. However, this is doubtful given the overwhelming amount of research that suggests supported employment produced more monetary benefits to all stakeholders (e.g., the employee, the taxpayer, and the society in general) than sheltered workshops (Baer, Simmons, Flexer, & Smith, 1995;Cimera, 1998;Conley, Rusch, McCaughrin, & Tines, 1989;Hill, Banks, Handrich, Wehman, Hill, & Shafer, 1987;Larson et al, 2007;Rusch, Conley, & McCaughrin, 1993).…”

Can Community-Based High School Transition Programs Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Supported Employment?

“…These variables were selected because of results from previous research that found cost of services, total hours worked, and gross earnings were significantly influenced by the supported employee's gender, disability, presence of a secondary disability, and where they received their services (cf. Cimera, 1998;Cimera, Shumar, Robbins, Dransfield, & Cowan, 2008;Lewis et al, 1992;Thompson, Powers, & Houchard, 1992). Age was also included as a matching variable in an effort to pair individuals with comparable experiences.…”

“…Numerous studies have investigated the monetary costs and benefits of supported employment from the perspective of the taxpayers, workers, and society in general (cf. Baer, Simmons, Flexer, & Smith, 1995;Cimera, 1998;Conley, Rusch, McCaughrin, & Tines, 1989;Hill & Wehman, 1983;Kregel, Wehman, & Banks, 1989;McCaughrin, Rusch, Conley, & Tines, 1991;Noble, Conley, Banjerjee, & Goodman, 1991;Rogers, Sciarappa, MacDonald-Wilson, & Danley, 1995;Wehman et al, 2003). Others have compared the programmatic costs of supported employment to those generated by sheltered workshops (cf.…”

Economic Evaluation of Supported-Employment Inspired Program for Pupils With Intellectual Disabilities

“…A multitude of economic evaluations of SE programs, comparing these to regular vocational training programs etc., has been conducted in the U.S. (Cimera, 1998(Cimera, , 2010a(Cimera, , 2012Conley et al, 1989;Hill & Wehman, 1983;Hill et al, 1987;Latimer, 2001;Rogers et al, 1995). An early European such study, for Wales, is the one by Beyer and Kilsby (1998).…”