| Citation: |
Bond, G.R., Picone, J., Mauer, B., Fishbein,S., & Stout, R. (2000). The quality of supported employment implementation scale.
Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 14 201-212.
|
| Title: |
The quality of supported employment implementation scale |
| Authors: |
Bond, G.R., Picone, J., Mauer, B., Fishbein,S., & Stout, R. |
| Year: |
2000 |
|
Journal/Publication:
|
Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation |
| Publisher: |
IOS Press |
| Full text: |
|
| Peer-reviewed? |
Yes
|
| NIDILRR-funded? |
No
|
|
Research design:
|
Associational research
|
| Background: |
Supported employment as an approach to assist individuals with the most severe disabilities, with gaining and maintaining work, has been described in the literature since the nineteen eighties. However, its implementation has been variable in the United States. A scale to measure the quality of supported employment implementation would be beneficial. |
|
Purpose:
|
The purpose of this study was to develop a checklist that could be used by program administrators or state planners to measure the implementation of supported employment programs for individuals with severe mental illness. |
|
Setting:
|
The study sites were 17 supported employment programs located in Kansas and New Jersey. |
|
Study sample: |
A total of 32 supported employment programs participated in the study. Twenty sites were in New Jersey and 12 in Kansas. Between the two states' programs, there was no significant difference in the longevity of the programs, number of employment specialist, number of consumers, staff to consumer ratios. They also did not differ in number of annual admissions. |
|
Intervention:
|
The intervention was the use of the Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale to evaluate services. |
|
Control or comparison condition:
|
There was no comparison or control condition. |
|
Data collection and analysis:
|
One and half hour semi structured telephone interviews were conducted with program managers using the Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale. The subscales were: vocational staffing, organization and services, from the Individual Placement and Support Fidelity Scale. After the interview, procedures were explained about collecting employment outcome data. Program directors were paid $100 for completing this activity. The data related to employment status of current consumers. |
|
Findings:
|
The inter-interviewer agreement was moderately high. Overall, internal consistency of the total scale was poor, so the researchers defined subscales. All 33 items on the Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale showed some variation. Both states showed high ratings suggesting moderate to full implementation in most of the measured areas. However there were some differences at the subscale and item level. New Jersey had significantly higher implementation of planning and support, while Kansas had higher implementation of integration of mental health. |
|
Conclusions:
|
The Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale can be sued to describe supported employment programs for individuals with severe mental illness. More research is needed. |
