Abstract
BACKGROUND:
This article summarizes the results of a needs assessment survey project presented at the 2021 National APSE Virtual Conference. This research was conducted by the Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center for Quality Employment (VRTAC-QE), a Technical Assistance Center funded by the Rehabilitation Services Administration, U.S. Department of Education.
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of the survey was to determine technical assistance and training needs of state VR counselors in four practice domains: (a) outreach services, (b) pre-employment transition services, (c) vocational rehabilitation services, and (d) employment services.
METHODS:
A national survey was conducted among 229 state vocational rehabilitation agency (SVRA) professionals, including directors, staff, and VR counselors, and 92 professionals in community-based rehabilitation agencies (CBRA), allowing a comparison of the relative importance ratings of the two groups.
RESULTS:
The ratings of both SVRA and CBRA professionals were generally aligned, but with some significant differences, as discussed in more detail in Tansey et al. (in press).
CONCLUSIONS:
The priorities identified through this survey will support the development and implementation of technical assistance activities that are responsive to the needs of SVRA professionals providing vocational rehabilitation to persons with disabilities and increasing the capacity of these agencies to promote quality employment outcomes.
Introduction
This article summarizes the results of a research project presented at the 2021 National APSE Virtual Conference. This research was conducted by the Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center for Quality Employment (VRTAC-QE), a Technical Assistance Center funded by the U.S. Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA). Given space limitations and the fact that this article is designed as a conference presentation summary, we refer readers to the complete discussion of the research methods and results, published in Tansey et al. (in press).
Employment provides access to independence, health care, income, and important health and psychosocial benefits (National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research [NIDILRR], 2019). Americans with disabilities have historically faced substantial barriers to employment and been employed at rates well below those of persons without disabilities. Indeed, even in the decade since the Great Recession, marked by significant economic growth in the United States, approximately 80% of Americans with disabilities remained outside the labor force, compared with 30% of people without a disability (U.S. Department of Labor [USDOL], b; Houtenville & Boege, 2019).
For over a century, the state-federal vocational rehabilitation (VR) program has played a key role in increasing the employment opportunities of Americans with disabilities through the provision of services and supports designed to lead to high-quality employment, independence, self-sufficiency, and full integration into community life (U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2020). The State-federal VR program is recognized as a highly successful and effective employment program, as reflected in multiple metrics, including the competitive integrated employment rate of VR participants, return on investment, efficiency, and consumer satisfaction (Chan et al., 2017; Tansey et al., 2015). However, employment data confirm that the goal of reducing the unemployment and underemployment of Americans with disabilities remains a significant challenge.
In order to maintain and improve its effectiveness, it is critical that the VR program continues to adapt to a changing labor market and employer needs, that VR counselors continue to learn new and updated employment and rehabilitation approaches and interventions, and that the program conduct effective outreach to an increasingly diverse population. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended in 2014 by Title IV of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA; 29 U.S.C. §720 et seq.), provides for the RSA to makes grants to provide State VR agency personnel with training and technical assistance (TA) designed to increase the skills of rehabilitation counselors and other qualified personnel engaged in providing vocational, medical, social, and psychological rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities. To this end, in 2020, the RSA funded the VR Technical Assistance Center for Quality Employment (VRTAC-QE) and the VRTAC on Quality Management (VRTAC-QM) are two such projects. These TA Centers were developed to increase the number and quality of employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities through training and TA to State VR agency personnel. The VRTAC–QM assists VR agency personnel to manage available resources better and improve service delivery, and the VRTAC–QE supports State VR agency personnel in implementing innovative and effective employment strategies and supporting practices (USDOE, 2020).
As presented at the 2021 National APSE Virtual Conference, the goal of the VRTAC-QE is to increase the number and quality of employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities through training and technical assistance to State VR Agency personnel and their community partners through TA on innovative and effective employment strategies and supporting practices. The VRTAC-QE was developed with several objectives to achieve this goal, including to identify and disseminate best practices in this broad range of employment and VR topics, and to provide TA, including intensive (ITA), targeted (TTA), and universal training and technical assistance (UTA) to state VR agencies, based on their specific needs. Universal TA includes the development and broad public dissemination of materials, information, trainings, and resources. As part of these activities, VRTAC-QE provides research summaries, plain language summaries, fact sheets, articles, asynchronous trainings and other training materials on a wide range of employment topics on its website. VRTAC-QE also provides TTA, which involves providing one-time or periodic training or content, specific to one state’s need or focus, and ITA, a more long-term and systematic training focused on change in a state’s VR policies, programs, or practices.
In an effort to ensure that VRTAC-QE is relevant and meets the needs and priorities of the state-federal VR program and its partners, in its initial year the VRTAC-QE conducted a series of needs assessment surveys designed to identify the needs and priorities for employment training, VR outreach, and employment services from the perspectives of multiple groups and stakeholders. These assessments served three purposes. They provided a national level scan of TA needs and priorities, provided the VRTAC-QE an understanding of the needs in the individual states, and helped prioritize and individualize the delivery of TA. In this paper, we summarize the results of a needs assessment survey conducted among State VR rehabilitation counselors and professionals in cooperating rehabilitation agencies and services.
Method
Procedures
A draft VRTAC-QE Needs Assessment questionnaire was developed based on review of prior recent national needs assessments, a comprehensive review of VR policies and documents, and an extensive research literature review. An initial draft of the questionnaire was developed based on these reviews and the VRTAC-QE recruited a group of 18 national experts and stakeholders to participate in a modified Delphi process to review and arrive at consensus on the survey content. The final version of the VRTAC-QE Needs Assessment questionnaire was hosted at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, using the Qualtrics Survey Hosting Service (2020; Qualtrics, Provo, UT) for distribution. The survey recruitment process involved several stages and multiple distributions. First, in cooperation with the VRTAC-QM and the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition: The Collaborative (NTACT:C), VRTAC-QE completed a comprehensive national needs assessment survey among State VR Agencies (SVRA). This survey was distributed between December 2020 and January 2021 in collaboration with the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR), which distributed information about the survey to each SVRA. This initial recruitment approach resulted in 85 participants. VRTAC-QE then recruited participants through distributions to multiple disability, professional, advocacy, and employer groups including through emails, listservs, social media, and website postings with cooperation from APSE, the Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification, the Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD), Social Security Administration Ticket to Work Employer Networks, and other consumer and disability advocacy groups.
Participants
Through these subsequent recruitment efforts, completed between February and May 2021, VRTAC-QE received completed surveys from a total of 229 SVRA professionals, including directors, staff, and VR counselors. An additional 92 personnel who worked in community-based rehabilitation agencies (CBRA) and provide support services for VR also completed the survey, allowing a comparison of the relative importance ratings of the two groups. Further details about the characteristics of the participants are provided in Tansey et al. (in press).
Measures
The VRTAC-QE Needs Assessment questionnaire was composed of 69 items addressing four technical assistance and training (TAT) need domains: (1) outreach services (24 items), (2) pre-employment services (5 items), (3) VR services (23 items), and (4) employment services (17 items). Participants were asked to rate the importance of each item to the success of State VR agencies in helping individuals with disabilities to become or remain in competitive integrated employment on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = “Not important”, 2 = “Somewhat important”, 3 = “Neutral”, 4 = “Important”, 5 = “Very important”). Participants then rated the level of need for State VR to increase capacity on the item’s focus in order to assist consumers to achieve quality employment outcomes, again based on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = “None, no need for TAT”, 2 = “A little need for TAT”, 3 = “Some need for TAT”, 4 = “Moderate need for TAT”, and 5 = “High need for TAT”).
Items in each TAT domain were scored using the following steps: (1) sum the importance score of each TAT item to yield a total TAT importance score; (2) divide the importance score for each TAT item by the total TAT importance score to obtain the relative TAT importance score for each item; (3) multiply the relative TAT importance score with the TAT need score, yielding a weighted TAT need score for each item; and (4) sum each of the weighted TAT need scores to yield a total TAT needs score that ranged from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating higher levels of TAT needs taking into account of perceived importance.
Data analysis
Descriptive statistics and correlational analyses were computed using the IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 27, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA.). Missing values were estimated using the simple imputation method provided by SPSS.
Results
The ratings of both SVRA and CBRA professionals were generally aligned, but with some significant differences, as discussed in more detail in Tansey et al. (in press). The five highest rankings resulting from each groups weighted TA need scores for both groups are presented in Table 1.
Comparative technical assistance and training needs rankings: SVRA and CBRA groups
Comparative technical assistance and training needs rankings: SVRA and CBRA groups
Of the 24 items in the outreach services domain, the SVRA personnel and CBRA personnel rated the same six groups as having the highest weighted need for TA: Outreach to (1) “youth with disabilities in foster care,” (2) “residents of rural and remote communities,” (3) “youth with disabilities,” (4) “African American communities,” (5) “Hispanic/Latin(x) communities,” and “persons involved in the criminal justice system.” The total weighted needs score for outreach services was computed to be 3.54 (SD = .765; range from 1 to 5), indicating that the SVRA professionals rated their TA needs for outreach services at between some-need and moderate-need levels.
Pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS)
For Pre-ETS services, personnel in both the SVRA group and the CBRA group rated needs for TA similarly. From highest to lowest, weighted TA need scores of the five TA in Pre-ETS were: (1) “Work-based learning experiences,” (2) “Self-advocacy,” (3) “Workplace readiness training,”, (4) “Job exploration counseling,”, and (5) “Counseling on opportunities for enrollment in transition or post-secondary programs.” The total weighted needs score for pre-employment services TA was computed to be 3.71 (SD = .95; range from 1 to 5), indicating that VR professionals in this study rated their TA needs for pre-employment services at the moderate-need level.
VR services
For the 23 VR services, among the SVRA participants the five practices with high weighted TA need scores were: (1) “Customized training in high demand occupations,” (2) “Distance or remote rehabilitation counseling services,” (3) “Work-based learning experiences,” (4) “Apprenticeships/pre-apprenticeships,” and (5) “Maintaining continuity of services during natural or human-caused disasters.” The total weighted needs score for VR services was computed to be 3.28 (SD = .725; range from 1 to 5), indicating that VR professionals in this study rated their TA needs for VR services at the some-need levels. Although the CBRA group also prioritized “Work-based learning experiences,” and “Customized training in high demand occupations,”, this group rated “Preparation for transition to competitive integrated employment” as being of higher weighted need (1), and “Apprenticeships/Pre-apprenticeships” lower (14).
Employment services
Of the 17 practices in the employment services domain, the practices with the highest weighted TA need scores as ranked by the SVRA group were: (1) “Business outreach (making business contacts to market VR services),” (2) “Job accommodations (i.e., modifications to the workplace),” (3) “Business engagement (services or activities to support business needs),” (4) “Supported employment,” and (5) “Dual-customer approaches (both businesses and consumers with disabilities are customers).” The total weighted needs score for employment services was computed to be 3.58 (SD = .847; range from 1 to 5), indicating that VR professionals in this study rated their TA needs for employment services at between some-need to moderate-need levels. Again, there was general agreement between the groups, but the CBRA group ratings gave relatively higher priority to “Competitive employment,” and Discrimination or disability rights legislation,” and relatively lower priority to “Business engagement” and “Dual-customer approaches” than the SVRA group.
Discussion
The results provide important information about both the perceived importance of, and need for training and technical assistance on, a wide variety of services and supports among SVRA rehabilitation counselors. First, in terms of outreach services technical assistance and training needs, a large number of items ranked as highly important, suggesting that the participants recognize the importance of expanded outreach. The results demonstrate awareness of the need for more effective community outreach strategies to traditionally underserved populations, including African American, Hispanic/Latin, Native American, and Asian American communities, and immigrants.
With respect to Pre-ETS, there was consistency in terms of the rated importance of TA between the SVRA and the CBRA groups, and in both groups the relative importance of transition-related TA was confirmed. In terms of VR services, the ratings, especially among the SVRA group, reflected VR’s increased emphasis on the dual-customer approach, in which VR services are designed to lead to competitive integrated employment outcomes for VR consumers, while also meeting the needs of employers. These items include customized training in high demand occupations, apprenticeships, internships, and work-based learning experiences. Finally, TA on services that promote competitive integrated employment, such as supported and customized employment, and those aligning with the emphasis of WIOA and the Rehabilitation Act Amendments on demand-side and dual-customer approaches (e.g., business outreach and engagement) were prioritized both in terms of importance and need for TA.
Conclusion
The VRTAC-QE Needs Assessment was designed to assess current technical assistance and training needs of SVRA and their affiliates and was an important and informative step in the development and implementation of TA activities that are responsive to the needs of SVRA and CBRA professionals providing vocational rehabilitation to persons with disabilities and increasing the capacity of these agencies to promote quality employment outcomes. The findings offer a framework to identify and implement supports to these agencies among the many contemporary challenges, and opportunities, that affect persons with disabilities full inclusion in work and society. Ongoing needs assessment among additional groups, including people with disabilities and disability advocacy groups, will continue to inform and improve the VRTAC-QE efforts to provide responsive, relevant, and prioritized TA.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge APSE and appreciate the opportunity to have presented the research described at the 2021 National APSE Virtual Conference.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical considerations
This study, as a program evaluation activity, was deemed exempt from Institutional Review Board approval by the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Informed consent
No identifying information (e.g., participants’ names, initials, or personally identifying information) was collected for the purpose of this study or is presented in this article. Informed consent was therefore not obtained.
Funding
The contents of this article were developed under grant no. H264K200003 from the Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center for Quality Employment, the U.S. Department of Education. However, the contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal government.