Several programs have attempted to improve labor market outcomes for youth and working-age adults with disabilities. To be successful, these programs must address the various barriers to employment typically encountered by this population. This topic area focuses on research determining which programs have been most effective at improving direct labor market outcomes such as employment and earnings; improving education and health status, which may affect a person’s ability to work; and decreasing federal disability benefit receipt.
Disability Employment Policy
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1985 - 2022.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
479
Findings:
Many disability employment interventions improved participant employment and earnings outcomes but few improved education and training, health, or public benefits receipt outcomes.
Transition programs and support services interventions improved the widest variety of outcome categories.
VR interventions improved employment and earnings outcomes but the effectiveness differed by disability type and the types of services received.
Supported employment interventions improved employment and earnings outcomes but the evidence base is small.
The two high-rated studies on benefits offsets showed no significant impact on earnings outcomes and an unfavorable impact on public benefits receipt outcomes.
The only high-rated study of a mental and behavioral health supports intervention showed promise.
Studies assessing the PROMISE intervention across multiple time points reported changes in outcomes.
Studies assessing the same intervention across multiple sites reported differing results.
View full synthesis report: Disability Employment Policy Research Synthesis
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 148
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana Resource Facilitation (RHI RF) program on employment outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to determine whether the number of VR…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Mental Health Treatment Study (MHTS), which provided supported employment services to Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) recipients…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
This study’s objective was to examine short-term (that is, 6- to 12-month) impacts of the Demonstration to Maintain Independence and Employment (DMIE). DMIE was implemented in Hawaii, Kansas,…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the State-Federal Vocational Rehabilitation (SFVR) Program on successful employment for individuals who are hard-of-hearing. The study used…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of work incentives benefits counseling (WIBC) on employment and earnings for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The study used a…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Compensatory Cognitive Training (CCT) on attaining competitive employment, weeks worked, wages earned, mental illness symptom severity, and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes for individuals who were blind or visually impaired (B/VI). The study used a…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes. The study uses a nonexperimental design to compare employment outcomes of youth with…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency (SVRA) services on employment and public benefits receipt outcomes.The study used a nonexperimental design to…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.