Use of Extended Employment

Services by VR Consumers

Dr. David Dean, University of Richmond

Presentation to the Employment Services Organizations Advisory Committee

Richmond, Virginia, February 8, 2011

Background

• Earlier analysis of supported employment (SE) focused on VR applicant cohort in SFY 2000

• Reported on use of supported employment and job coach training services (JCTS) by VR consumers who applied in 2000

• Examined VR service costs and employment outcomes (both pre- and post-closure) for those who received SE &/or JCTS

Background (cont.)

• Recently accessed DRS data on Extended Employment Services (EES) and Long-Term Employment Support Services (LTESS) for the SFY 2000 applicant cohort

• Currently examining just LTESS/EES data, before combining with VR services data for “big-picture” return-on-investment study

Current Analysis

• Includes VR applicants in SFY 2000 who subsequently received EES/LTESS for the first time through April 2010

• Participants could receive long-term follow-along (LTESS) and/or extended employment services (EES)

• 596 individuals received only follow-along, 207 received only EES, 37 received both at some point through April 2010

Who Gets LTESS/EES?

Characteristic at Time ofSFY 2000 Application

Type of Services Received

LTESS EES

Age at Application for VR 30.7 years 34.1 years

Percent Male 56.5% 51.7%

Percent Caucasian 60.7% 70.0%

Percent with HS Degree or More 47.8% 33.8%

Percent on SSI at VR Application 32.9% 52.2%

Percent on TANF at VR Application 2.2% 3.9%

Percent Supporting Themselves 12.2% 2.4%

Percent with Anxiety Disorder 13.4% 8.2%

Percent with Cognitive Impairment 44.0% 48.8%

Percent with Personality Disorder 4.0% 5.3%

Percent with Schizophrenia/Psychoses 15.3% 16.9%

Percent with Specific Learning Disabilities 7.1% 1.5%

Percent with Other Disabilities 12.3% 16.4%

Percent with Secondary Disability 40.1% 47.8%

VR Service Costs and Closure Status

SFY 2000 “base” caseType of Services Received

LTESS EES

Cost of VR Purchased Services $3,976 $2,828

% with Employment Outcome 77.2% 80.7%

% with no Employment Outcome

13.4% 14.0%

% Dropout 5.5% 3.9%

% Not Accepted 3.9% 1.5%

% Competitively Employed 63.9% 16.9%

Mean Median Low High

Avg. no. months employed/served (out of approx. 120 mos.)

26 14 1 108

Avg. per-person expenditures over the period

$8,188 $3,022 $31 $93,421

EES/LTESS participants who applied for VR in SFY 2000

Annual EES/LTESS Participation Rates, as reported by ESOs

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9

Year Following Application for VR Services

Pe

rce

nt

Re

ce

ivin

g S

erv

ice

s

EES

LTESS

Average Annual EES/LTESS Service Costs vs. Average Annual Earnings

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

$8,000

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9

Year following SFY 2000 application for VR

Mea

n A

nnu

al A

mo

un

t (20

09 $

)

EES service cost

LTESS service cost

EES participant earnings

LTESS participant earnings

Average Hourly Wages and Service Costs for LTESS Participants

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Month Relative to VR Application Month

Mea

n H

ou

rly

Am

ou

nt (

2009

$) i

f an

y

Average Hourly Wages and Service Costs for EES

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Month Relative to VR Application Month

Mea

n H

ou

rly

Am

ou

nt (

2009

$) i

f an

y Wages per Hour

Services per Hour

Calculating Benefit-Cost Ratios for EES/LTESS (SFY 2000 Applicants)

LTESS EES

Present Value* (PV) of Wages

$860 $394

PV of Services $242 582

Net PV $618 -$188

Benefit-Cost Ratio 3.55 0.68

Note: PV calculated at 3% discount rate

Next Steps in Refining ROI Framework

• More comprehensive look at service costs:– VR service costs for ALL episodes of VR

services (both in-house and purchased),– EES/LTESS service costs, and– “Similar benefits” provided by others

• Additional data on employment outcomes

• Examining subgroups of recipients with specific types of impairments

• Will get input from ESOAC as work progresses