Skip to main content

Absence of conflict of interest. 

Citation

Giesen, J.M. & Hierholzer, A. (2015). Vocational rehabilitation services and employment for SSDI beneficiaries with visual impairments. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 44(2016), 175-189. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-150789

Highlights

  • 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 nonexperimental design to investigate the effects of VR services on competitive employment. The authors conducted statistical models to predict competitive employment using the Rehabilitation Service Administration national administrative data. 
  • The study found that Job-Related and Training and Support groupings of VR services were significantly related to higher likelihoods of obtaining competitive employment for B/VI individuals. Conversely, receipt of Special and Remedial groupings of VR services were related to lower likelihoods of obtaining competitive employment for B/VI individuals. 
  • This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services; other factors are likely to have contributed. 

Intervention Examined

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services

Features of the Study

The study used a nonexperimental design to determine the types of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services that would lead to more competitive employment outcomes for VR participants who were B/VI and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries. Sample data were obtained from the Rehabilitation Services Administration's (RSA) 911 report for fiscal year 2011, an administrative dataset collected by each state VR agency on consumers they serve. Eligible participants included individuals who were B/VI, who were living in the United States and received SSDI benefits in the 2011 fiscal year, and who were between the ages of 18 and 75.  

Individuals in the study sample were predominantly white (65%) and over half were male (55%) with an average age of 47. The group under analysis received VR services through their local VR agency. The administrative dataset identified whether the participant was competitively employed according to the RSA's definition and identified 22 available services that a participant may have received such as on-the-job training or interpreter services. The dataset also contained participant demographic information (e.g., gender, age, ethnicity) and state or agency information (e.g., state unemployment rate, agency structure type) that were used as control variables during analyses. The authors used statistical models to determine which groups of services and which individual services predicted competitive employment outcomes for VR program participants who were B/VI. 

Findings

Employment 

  • The study found that Job-Related VR services were significantly related to a higher likelihood of obtaining competitive employment for individuals who were B/VI. This included job placement assistance, job search assistance, on-the-job supports, and on-the-job training. In contrast, job readiness training services were significantly related to a lower likelihood of obtaining competitive employment.  
  • The study also found that Training and Support VR services were significantly related to a higher likelihood of obtaining competitive employment for individuals who were B/VI. This included rehabilitation technology and maintenance. However, disability related skills training was significantly related to a lower likelihood of obtaining competitive employment.  
  • The study found that Special and Remedial VR services were significantly related to a lower likelihood of obtaining competitive employment for individuals who were B/VI. This included individual reader services and interpreter services.  
  • No other VR services were significantly related to competitive employment outcomes.  

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The study authors did not include sufficient control variables, namely a preintervention measure of employment or earnings. These preexisting differences between the participants—and not the VR services—could explain the observed differences in outcomes. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs. 

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the VR service receipt; other factors are likely to have contributed. 

Reviewed by CLEAR

January 2024