Providing technical assistance to inclusive postsecondary education programs on paid employment experiences of college students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A case study

1.1 Purpose of the study

The importance of a higher education experience ultimately leading to a career for individuals with IDD cannot be overstated. Though over 300 IPSE programs exist in the US, the level of inclusion can vary among programs. For example, according to the 2020-2021 TPSID Annual Report released by Think College, 47% of students enrolled in current TPSID-funded programs have had at least one paid job or work-based learning experience. That means more than half of the students did not have any paid employment. Out of the 47%, only 66% of the work-based learning experiences were paid at or above minimum wage, while 34% were paid below minimum wage. Knowing the impact of higher education on employment, a systematic literature review was conducted on how employment supports are provided in IPSE programs. The current literature primarily focuses on employment strategies (e.g., Lindstrom et al., 2009; Gilmore, 2002; Wehman et al., 2018), but none directly applied using these strategies for students with IDD in college. It became apparent that additional research was needed on the use of strategies, in particular, supported employment, in IPSE programs to assist personnel in increasing paid employment opportunities for college students with IDD.

This article draws from a study that was conducted to determine the effects of trained personnel providing employment support in IPSE programs on paid employment experiences of students with IDD. The research team designed the study based on their experience implementing an IPSE program, ACE-IT in College (ACE-IT), as part of the first TPSID cohort in 2010. ACE-IT uses evidence-based practices incorporating the standards for IPSE programs established by Think College, and the standards for supported employment by the Association of People Supporting Employment First.

Students in ACE-IT adhere to course requirements and audit a variety of required and elective courses with other VCU students. Students receive in-class and out-of-class support from academic coaches. Additional academic supports include academic advisors, the Student Accessibility and Education Office, the writing center, and professors. One of the critical elements of ACE-IT, which was established at the beginning of the program’s implementation, was that every student would maintain paid employment and receive support from trained job coaches. During the three semesters of academics, students work on campus in part-time paid employment positions. During their final semester, the students transition into an internship in their career choice. ACE-IT has a 100% paid employment rate for students while in the program (earning minimum wage or above), and a 90% employment rate post-graduation.

2.1 Research questions

The original research questions were modified for the case study design. The research team revised the study for the first year, and the protocol amendment was approved by the university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB).

RQ1: Which aspects of the online training and technical assistance were most instrumental in providing paid employment and/or paid internship opportunities for students with IDD while in college?

RQ2: What are the employment outcomes for students with IDD post-graduation who participated in paid employment and/or paid internship opportunities?

The research team also examined the fidelity of implementation to ensure the online course and technical assistance procedures were followed according to the established protocol. The National Implementation Research Network, housed at UNC-Chapel Hill, provides comprehensive information and resources on implementation science (NIRN, 2019). In their review of the research on implementation, they found positive correlations between fidelity and outcomes. In addition, studies showed that more changes to the program had adverse effects –while modifications should be made based on contextual factors, significant deviations from the original program negatively affected outcomes. Franks and Schroeder (2013) state in their presentation that implementation does not measure the outcomes of evidence-based practice; rather, it measures the process.

2.2 Research methods

The study protocol called for the following data sources to be used for the Cohort 1 case study.

The case study participant took the course in spring 2020 and implementation of the technical assistance started in October 2020. The activities for this single case study occurred through October 2021. The evaluator was able to begin case study activities immediately. In addition to all activities listed under “Document Review” in Table 1, the evaluator reviewed the case notes.

3.1 Review of facilitated discussion board entries

Course participants responded to a specific prompt in the discussion board each week that aligned with course content from that week’s lesson. The following paragraphs include an overview of each weekly topic and a summary of Spenser’s discussion posts.

In the first week of the course, participants reviewed videos and required materials about career development standards for IPSE programs and quality indicators that make a high-quality SE program. Per the discussion board prompt for the week, participants were to provide an overview of their program and select one quality indicator for IPSE programs (Grigal et al., 2012) or one quality indicator for SE programs (APSE, 2010) that needs priority attention for improving their own IPSE program. Spenser reflected on her hopes for the 6-week course and stated that she would like to work on “personalized job development and relationship marketing, utilizing personal networking,” which is an Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE) SE competency. Spenser chose this competency to learn how to connect with families and social networks so that they can use familiar resources and connections.

In week two, course participants learned about the importance and process of getting to know each student, how to use person-centered planning in higher education, and updating career plans. Discussion board posts were to include a description of how program staff assess students’ abilities, interests, preferences, conditions for success, and support needs. Additionally, participants described how they will implement materials or change practices as a result of the information they reviewed this week. Spenser shared that her team works with their students (1:1 meetings, interviews, etc.) to gather information about interests, abilities, preferences, support needs, and conditions for success. Spenser emphasized the importance of work experiences and shared that as a result of this week’s lesson, she wanted to focus on having students experience several work opportunities to increase their exposure to different employment settings and be able to figure out what they liked best.

In week three, the course focused on job development. Participants gained information on networking, marketing, and other job development strategies. In this week’s discussion post, participants developed their own “elevator pitch” to market their program. Participants then shared other strategies from this week’s lesson that they might use to secure a placement. Spenser reflected on current practices and noted that she could tweak marketing materials for different audiences (i.e., employers, potential partners). Spenser described her elevator pitch to employers, which would include a description of the program, the program’s interest in collaborating with organizations/employers who would like to support students through an internship, information about supports provided through the program (i.e., job coach, peer mentor), and that the employment needs to be paid.

Week four included a review of the customized employment. Per the discussion board, participants were to share experiences with customized employment and how they might implement these strategies in their programs. Spenser shared that customized employment can be time-consuming and requires a great deal of effective communication. However, Spenser recognized that her program needs help with negotiating payment. Spenser mentioned that the employers indicate that they have budgeting constraints; however, they are more than willing to accept the student’s help at no cost. Spenser mentioned that not paying her students resulted in the view of the employers not valuing the position or the work.

In week five, participants learned about jobsite training, the critical role job coaches play, best practices for providing instruction during jobsite training, and strategies to create a fading plan (when the job coach starts to fade out). The discussion post had participants share their own jobsite training practices, how they can improve them, and their experiences with jobsite fading. Spenser expressed that she wanted to formalize their jobsite training practices and would be working on this during the upcoming academic year. Spenser also shared a success story about fading supports on a jobsite and how this experience exhibited the student’s independence on the jobsite. In fact, at the time of the discussion, the student still worked at the job independently, and the jobsite continued to be a resource for the program.

Finally, in week six, participants learned about the transition needs of students graduating from college, the practice of developing a transition checklist to prepare students for employment beyond the program, and how to implement follow-up procedures. This week’s discussion board prompt focused on transitioning students from college to their careers. Spenser described implementing a two-year program model completely focused on college to career. Spenser would like to concentrate on increasing job development and job shadowing experiences, building skills, and making connections with potential employment sites. Spenser also mentioned their current follow-up procedure that includes following up with their graduates by sending out a survey 60 days after graduation.

3.2 Review of technical assistance

The technical assistance with a member of the VCU research team began soon after the conclusion of the course, with the first meeting in October 2020. The TA protocol consisted of participants completing the Needs Assessment to determine areas of focus for the year-long TA; completion of an Action Plan; monthly check-in meetings for 12 months, mostly through Zoom, with occasional email updates, when feasible; and completion of tasks (tasks are set based on Needs Assessment results, as well as discussions during monthly meetings). An overview of the Action Plan, monthly meetings, and the TA instructor case notes follows.

3.3 Findings

The findings and outcomes of the technical assistance were analyzed using the study’s research questions. The questions and findings are summarized below.

3.4 RQ1

Which aspects of the online training and technical assistance were most instrumental in providing paid employment and/or paid internship opportunities for students with IDD while in college? Hypothesis: Most helpful aspects are: increasing skills in providing supported employment, technical support on establishing on-campus employment, and working with employers.

The online training was developed to cover all aspects of providing supported employment, from getting to know the student all the way to student independence on the job, and not just those listed in the hypothesis. The TA serves the individual needs of the program, and it serves to build on the skillset of the university program staff. This particular program wanted to focus on Job Development and Customized Employment, which entails establishing on-campus employment, as well as working with employers. As evidenced in the monthly meeting notes, the program staff made a list of potential on-campus employers. They also focused on language to use with employers during face-to-face meetings, as well as emails. The two program staff members were able to establish a process using the templates and checklists, which they felt were extremely useful. Staff connected with potential employers, using the language they developed during the TA, and responses were positive. The program staff were able to convert a position that had traditionally been an unpaid internship into paid employment, as a direct result of the TA.

3.5 RQ2

What are the employment outcomes for students with IDD post-graduation who participated in paid employment and/or paid internship opportunities? Hypothesis: Students with IDD who participated in paid employment and/or paid internship opportunities will have greater employment opportunities after graduation as compared to outcomes of TPSID.

Data for this research question are still being collected and are not available at this time.

3.6 Fidelity of implementation

The VCU research staff member was responsible for ensuring the fidelity of implementation for the yearlong TA. Participants had to complete the course in a certain amount of time prior to starting the TA. During the planning phase, VCU TA provider and program staff discussed the key activities. Those were to: (1) touch base, at a minimum, each month; (2) create a monthly agenda template (Appendix 3); (3) plan TA activities based on the needs assessment; and (4) provide resources as needed.

The VCU research team member did not meet with case study program staff every month via Zoom; however, she did meet with them most months throughout the year. When program staff requested email contact due to their workload, the VCU research staff member made sure to touch base via email to ensure the program staff was making progress toward their goals. For example, the program staff requested an email update for February 2021. During the previous month’s Zoom meeting, the group reviewed a spreadsheet. For the February update, the program staff had begun to enter the data into the spreadsheet, which they found helpful.

The VCU staff member emphasized the importance of creating a meeting agenda template and adhering to it. This saved program staff members time in preparing for each meeting. The Action Plan also outlined the TA activities, which were based on their needs assessment. This helped them plan their work over the entire year. Finally, the research staff member provided multiple resources at every meeting and check-in.

4.1 Sustainability of programs

Think College’s standards, quality indicators, and benchmarks (Grigal et al., 2012) continue to serve as the gold standard for quality IPSE programs. Three standards in particular are extremely relevant in terms of the sustainability of programs: standard 5, alignment with college systems and practices; standard 6, coordination and collaboration; and standard 7, sustainability. This study confirms the importance of Think College standards, quality indicators, and benchmarks relevant to sustainability of programs and contributes additional considerations.