Community Rehabilitation Providers Talk About Employment for Individuals with 
Disabilities and Their Organizations

        Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), in partnership with the Institute for 
Community Inclusion (ICI) at the University of Massachusetts Boston, are providing a program 
of technical assistance and training that is being delivered and disseminated nationally to 
community rehabilitation programs that utilize the Fair Labor Standards Act’s Section 14 (c) 
Special Minimum Wage certificates.  VCU and ICI are working aggressively with community 
rehabilitation programs (CRPs) who utilize Section 14c certificates to evolve their programs 
from segregated work outcomes and non-work options.  The Training and Technical Assistance 
for Providers (T-TAP) project will build the capacity of CRPs to facilitate “individually 
determined, customized employment in non-stereotypic competitive jobs for persons with 
disabilities.” 

       Background and Methodology: As part of the early planning stage, the T-TAP project 
reached out to a sample of organizations that hold Section 14 (c) Special Minimum Wage 
certificates. The goal of these interviews was to better understand the structure, goals, and 
priorities of these organizations, and to guide project training and technical assistance. Senior 
managers from twenty-five these organizations were interviewed by telephone. In exchange for 
their participation, the organizations were offered free registration to the live Webcast series 
sponsored by T-TAP on topics such as technology in the workplace, job development, and 
customized employment strategies. 

        This summary has three sections: 
        1. A general description of the respondents, including the type of services 
provided, the number of individuals served and the number of individuals covered by the 
14c certificate, employment categories of those served, and funding sources. 
        2. Details of organizations' development processes, focusing on changes 
undergone in the past three years and changes anticipated over the next three years. 
        3. The challenges encountered in finding integrated community employment for 
individuals with disabilities, staff training needs, current resources for training, and topics 
for future training.
        


General Information: Who Are the Organizations? 
        The majority of the participating organizations provided a range of employment 
services including evaluation, sheltered employment, group supported employment, and 
job placement. A few organizations offered other types of services such as living skills 
classes, residential, day care, and senior day programs. The largest organization served 
562 individuals with disabilities, the smallest served 26, with an average of 
approximately 90 (some respondents reported ranges of those served). 

        In several instances, all of the individuals served by an organization received sub-
minimum wage. In most organizations, over 50% of the total population served received 
sub-minimum wage. There were a few exceptions, the most notable being an organization 
that served a total of 100 individuals with only 6 receiving sub-minimum wage. 
Typically, individuals who received sub-minimum wage were working in sheltered or 
group supported employment placements, including enclaves and mobile crews. In a 
couple of cases, most of the individuals served were in facility-based non-work activities. 

        Typically, organizations used a combination of government (state, federal, and 
local) and private funding (foundation grants, donations, revenue from work contracts).   
Five organizations specifically reported utilizing Medicaid waiver funds. One 
organization was completely self-funded by revenue from its stores. Two organizations 
had secured NISH contracts.


Organizational Development: How Are They Changing?

        Six of the twenty-five respondents reported that there had not been any changes in their 
organization or distribution of services in the past three years. However, the majority pointed to a 
harsh economic climate as a factor negatively impacting the amount and type of employment 
available to the individuals they serve. Some organizations (approximately five) described a 
general trend towards trying to increase employment in the community for their clients, and 
shifting their mission to reflect this goal. 
        In terms of changes in the future, four organizations reported that they did not anticipate 
any changes in their employment services in the next three years. The remaining respondents 
indicated that they foresaw changes in the following areas: 

Changes in the population served to more severely disabled and/or older,
Increases in self-employment and community integrated employment,
Reduced range of services due to funding constraints,
Increased growth of the organization overall.


Staff Challenges and Training: What Do They Want?
 
       The challenges noted were largely community-level issues. The respondents repeatedly 
referred to similar challenges in finding integrated community employment for clients, regardless 
of the size or location of the organization. Many primarily noted the current economy and high 
unemployment rate as barriers to finding employment for their clients because more qualified 
and non-disabled candidates were applying for jobs. In addition, the stereotypes and lack of 
understanding regarding the abilities of individuals with disabilities continued to be a major 
challenge for most of the organizations. Transportation was also an important barrier to securing 
and maintaining employment for clients. Two organizations discussed the barriers posed by 
consumers' families due to their fear of losing funding and/or their discomfort with change. 

        Many of the respondents felt that they had satisfactory training for their staff. The most 
common topic they requested further training on was behavior management of clients with 
emotional or psychiatric difficulties. In addition, several organizations expressed a need for staff 
training on specific types of disabilities. However, all of the respondents reported that further 
training in job development, job carving/creation, developing relationships with employers, 
community integration, natural supports, and working with families would be beneficial to their 
staff. Many of the organizations described other content areas that would be beneficial for their 
staff to receive further training. This included the following:
        general life skills development for clients, 
        self-determination, 
        instructional strategies for people with alternative learning styles, 
        specialized training in areas such as assistive technology and independence, 
        coping with severe behavior problems, 
        solving transportation problems creatively, 
        conflict resolution, 
        communication between employers and staff about problems as they arise, 
research on rate of injury for employees with disabilities versus employees without 
disabilities, and the process of applying for 14c wage certificates.  

The resources organizations reported currently using for training included state/local agency 
training (i.e., DMR), internally designed curricula, and local universities. 

        The predominant source of training was internally designed curriculums and seminars. 
The majority of respondents did not report frequent use of external resources for training, 
including Internet resources. However, they expressed interest in access to training that was 
affordable and readily accessible. All of the organizations reported having a computer with 
Internet access readily available and accessible. Similarly, all respondents stated that their staff 
received release time for training. Due to small staff size, several organizations’ ability to release 
staff for training was dependent on scheduling variables, and meant waiting until clients had left 
for the day or other staff members could provide coverage.

	In summary, this preliminary work is essential for providing assistance to providers in 
evolving their programs to provide integrated employment outcomes (i.e., non section 14 (c) 
employment) and to increasing wages of people with disabilities who are currently working at 
less than minimum wage through the use of customized employment strategies and individual 
choice.   Similar research endeavors will continue through the fall with the administration of a 
national survey to more than 500 CRP’s. 
		1