Current practices in job matching: A Project SEARCH perspective on transition

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Individuals with disabilities are employed at rates significantly lower than those without disabilities. Job matching has been an integral part of supported employment practices for individuals with disabilities for over 30 years. However, no research examines the specific practices of key stakeholders who make job matching decisions with, or on behalf of, individuals with disabilities.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the: a) current practices in job matching, b) outcomes of the job matching process, and c) tools used by Project SEARCH professionals to inform job matching decisions.

METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods sequential-explanatory research design to examine the practices of key stakeholders involved in job matching. Stakeholders were students and professionals participating in transition using the Project SEARCH model. Quantitative and narrative data were collected by survey during the first phase of the study. A second, qualitative phase employed a multiple case study design using focus groups to evaluate the perspectives of key professional and consumer stakeholder groups.

RESULTS: Integration of quantitative and qualitative data revealed that: a) job matching is a collaborative process, b) stakeholders consider many different types of data when job matching, c) current practices in job matching are variable and lack consistency, and d) outcomes of the job matching process are poorly defined.

CONCLUSIONS: Additional resources are needed to support the efforts of stakeholders who make job matching decisions with, or on behalf of, individuals with disabilities. In the absence of formal resources, key stakeholders who utilize a collaborative, consistent, data-driven process for job matching are most likely to observe positive outcomes.

Keywords

Job matching special education vocational rehabilitation occupational therapy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. (2012) About the president’s committee for people with intellectual disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.acl.gov/programs/aidd/Programs/PCPID/index.aspx

Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013). Persons with a disability: Labor force characteristics summary. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/disabl.nr0.htm

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2006). Economic costs associated with mental retardation, cerebral palsy, hearing loss, and vision impairment - united states, 2003. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55, 881

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

United States Census Bureau & American Community Survey. (2013). 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1703. Retrieved May 28, 2014 from http://factfinder2.census.gov

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

H. R. 803–113th Congress: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. (2013)

65.