The National Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers, FY2002-2003

Over the past twenty years extensive research and practice has demonstrated that individuals with significant disabilities can be successful members of the labor market. Federal policy also emphasizes employment through regulation and legislation including the Rehabilitation Act and Rehabilitation Services Administration policy, the Workforce Investment Act (WIA); the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act; the Olmstead Decision; and President Bush's "New Freedom Initiative".

Despite these initiatives, data on the employment of people with developmental disabilities suggest that there continues to be a bias toward sheltered and non-work services in funding and service delivery, including a substantial continuing investment in sheltered employment services.

Two recent reports from the FY2002-2003 National Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRPs) give a current snapshot of CRPs and the services they provide. The survey provides a national estimate of the distribution of services and outcomes from data provided directly by CRPs. While the results emphasize individuals with developmental disabilities, the full reports include information on all individuals supported by CRPs ( Full Report 1:Overview of Services and Provider Characteristics  |  Full Report 2: Non-Work Services). Two brief reports are currently available:

Report 1: Overview of Services and Provider Characteristics  (Full Report 1:Overview of Services and Provider Characteristics)

Results indicate that the majority of CRPs that provided employment services offered both integrated and sheltered employment, however integrated employment had not significantly replaced the model of sheltered employment. Core findings include:

• Of the 54,833 people supported by the CRPs in both employment and non-work day services, 70% were identified as people with developmental disabilities.
• Individuals with developmental disabilities are predominantly in sheltered employment or non-work services. The CRPs reported serving 74% of individuals with developmental disabilities in sheltered employment, day habilitation services, and non-work community integration supports.
• Of the 26% of individuals with developmental disabilities working in integrated employment, the majority (18%) are in individual competitive jobs, with 5% reported working in enclaves and 3% in mobile work crews.
• Responses to this survey suggested that the average size of an enclave is six and the average size of a mobile work crew is five.
• The majority of community rehabilitation providers provide both employment and non-work services.
• The majority of providers that provided employment services offered both integrated and sheltered employment. Sixty-five percent of CRPs (165) offered employment in both integrated and sheltered settings. Seventeen percent (43) provided employment only in integrated settings, and 11% (28) only provided sheltered employment.

Report 2: Non-Work Services   (Full Report 2: Non-Work Services)

The proportion of individuals participating in non-work programs has grown noticeably over the past decade. Despite the push toward integrated employment for people with developmental disabilities in many states, non-work day programs continue to be a substantial component of the service mix. These services include both facility-based programs such as day habilitation or day activity services and community-based non-work services, typically referred to as community participation or community integration services.

The analysis of the FY2002-2003 National Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers confirms non-work as a significant component in the service mix. Findings include:

• Over one third of individuals served annually by CRPs were in non-work programs only.
• The majority of individuals in non-work services (21% of all individuals reported by the CRPs) were in facility-based settings.
• The majority of individuals in non-work services were identified as having a developmental disability.
• A significant number of individuals (10% of all individuals reported) are in community-based non-work services, but the results demonstrate a slight but noticeable bias toward group and disability-specific activities that raise concerns about the opportunities and outcomes that these services represent.

The National Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers was conducted by staff of the Institute for Community Inclusion, University of Massachusetts Boston, including Deborah S. Metzel, Heike Boeltzig, John Butterworth, Dana S. Gilmore, and Jennifer Sullivan. The Survey was supported by the Administration on Developmental Disabilities, Administration for Children and Families, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.