national trends in employment for individuals · anne raish; special legal counsel, united states...

National Trends in Employment for Individuals

July 21, 2015

Panelists

Anthony Antosh; Director, Paul V. Sherlock Center on Disabilities, Rhode Island College John Butterworth; Director of Employment Systems Change and Evaluation, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Community Inclusion David Mank; Director, Indiana Institute on Disability and Community Anne Raish; Special Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice

Fernald (1915)

Support of Family and Friends

Competent, Caring Staff

Something Meaningful To Do

The Issue

There has been research about effective strategies for promoting employment for at least 40 years

The percent of people with disabilities engaged in the workforce has remained low throughout that period

So the question is – If we know what to do, why don’t we do it?

Agenda

Butterworth – National Trends in Employment

Mank – Impact of Policy and Legislation

Raish – ADA and Olmstead Enforcement

Antosh - Implementation of the Rhode Island Consent Decree; Reactions and Questions for the Panelists

Questions and Discussion

John Butterworth

Employment Trends and Challenges

January 23, 2015

2015 Summer Leadership Institute

http://www.statedata.info

How many people are employed?

8.5% 14.7%

18.6%

0%

25%

50%

ACS CognitiveDisability + SSI

2013

National CoreIndicators 2012-13

IDD AgencySurvey 2013

Employment and Day Supports IDD Agencies: Nation

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

1990 1993 1996 1999 2004 2008 2013

Total Served

Integrated Employment

Source: ICI National Survey of State IDD Agencies

113,271

607,959

Non-work is growing CRPs: 2002 to 2010

10

18.0%

36.0% 33.0%

19.0% 25.2%

43.0%

0%

50%

100%

IndividualIntegrated Jobs

Facility BasedWork

Non-Work

2002-2003 2010

Source: 2010-2011 Survey of Community Rehabilitation Providers, ICI

Participation in integrated employment services varies widely

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Source: ICI National Survey of State IDD Agencies

High-Performing Framework

Mean Hours and Wages per week Hours

worked Gross

Wages Hourly Wage

Individually-supported job

12 $93 $8.49

Competitive job 13 $100 $8.27

Group supported job 14 $86 $6.76

Paid facility-based job 16 $28 $2.39

Source: National Core Indicators Project 2012-2013

Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agency Services and

Outcomes

# Exiting Vocational Rehabilitation Individuals with an intellectual disability

59,865

48,847

25,878

16,675

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Total closures

Closures into employment

Source: Rehabilitation Services Administration 911

Mean Hours and Wages per week

Intellectual Disability

Other Disability

Closed into Employment 32% 31%

Rehabilitation Rate 50% 51%

Got job in one year 30% 34%

Mean hours worked 24 31

Mean weekly wage $200 $379

Source: Rehabilitation Services Administration 911 FY2013

VR Outcomes vary widely Rehabilitation rate by state

0%

50%

100%

Source: Rehabilitation Services Administration 911 FY2013

Challenges

Supporting Choice


No paid job 85%

Paid job 15%

Does not want job

53%

Wants job 47%

No job goal in ISP

70%

Job goal 30%

605,680 243,339 170,337

Changing Investments

FB & Non-Work

FB & Non-Work 86.5%

Services Funding

Integrated Employment 18.6%

Integrated Employment 13.5%

Source: ICI National Survey of State IDD Agencies 2013

Ensuring a Meaningful Day Mean hours worked/week Individual Supported Jobs

7.6

18.8

0

20

40

NH AL

NC

KY

UT IL HI

SC OR

WI

MS

AR FL

MEO

RC

VA IN NJ

MD CT

PA LA

MO

GA TX NY

OH



Investment in Career Paths Working in a paid job in the community but would like to work somewhere else...

No 61%

In Between 9%

Yes 29%

Common definitions and goals Percent in Group Supported Jobs

0%

50%

100%

KY

TX IN WI

AL FL MS

AR

PA

NC

NH

NY IL

MO LA HI

GA

UT

SC

ME

OR

CN

JM

DO

HO

RV

A CT

National Core Indicators Project 2012-2013

Engaging young adults early

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

CommunityJob

FB Work CB Non-Work FB Non-Work

18-34 35-54Source: National Core

Indicators Project 2012-2013

Partnerships VR Closures by Age at Application

<16 2%

16-21 48%

22-30 22%

30+ 28%

Source: Rehabilitation Services Administration 911 Persons with an intellectual disability

Partnerships Percent of VR Closures that are persons with ID

0%

10%

20%

30%

UT

NV

MA

AR

AK SC NJ

NH

MT

WY

NM TX M

I

AZ FL ID NY

WV RI

OK

CT

MN PA

WI

DC

OR

NE

VT

CA LA KS

OH US

ND

CO

WA

MD

ME IL DE

SD AL

MS

KY HI

IN GA IA VA

MO TN NC

Source: Rehabilitation Services Administration 911

Realigning resources Employment Consultant time distribution

27

Holistic Perspective

Federal Policy

Community

& Labor

Market

Workplace

State Policy

& Strategy

Community

Rehabilitation

Provider

Practices

Individuals &

Families

Employment

Supports

Individual

Employment

Outcomes

John Butterworth

(617) 287-4357

[email protected]

www.StateData.info

www.communityinclusion.org/aie

www.RealWorkStories.org

www.seln.org

www.partnershipsinemployment.com

http://www.partnershipsinemployment.com/

David Mank

Advisory Committee on

Increasing Competitive Integrated

Employment for Individuals with Disabilities (ACICIEID)


July, 2015

PREPARE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SECRETARY OF LABOR ON:

Ways to increase competitive integrated employment

People with intellectual/developmental disabilities Individuals with significant disabilities

Advisory Committee on Increasing

Competitive Integrated Employment for

Individuals with Disabilities (ACICIEID)

Advisory Committee on

Increasing Competitive

Integrated Employment for

Individuals with Disabilities

(ACICIEID)

January 2015 – September 2016

PREPARE FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SECRETARY OF LABOR ON:

Ways to increase competitive integrated employment

People with intellectual/developmental disabilities Individuals with significant disabilities







The use of Section 14(c) (1938) Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Ways to improve oversight of such certificates




DUTIES INCLUDE “Committee advise the Secretary on development and implementation of coordinated policies and job-driven strategies across federal agencies” Evaluate the use of 14(c) in light of goals of competitive integrated employment




DUTIES INCLUDE Review existing federal policy and make recommendations (including employment services, long-term supports, family support, and transportation)




COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Self-Advocates (3) Employment Service Providers (2) National Advocacy Organizations (3) Academics (2) Employers (2) Other Representatives (5)

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP ODEP – USDOL ETA – USDOL WHD – USDOL AIDD CMS SSA RSA




SUB-COMMITTEES

Transition to Careers Complexity in Delivering Competitive Integrated Employment Marketplace Dynamics Building State and Local Capacity

ADDITIONAL SUB-COMMITTEES

AbilityOne® 14(c) FLSA

COMPETITIVE INTEGRATED

EMPLOYMENT

Full time or part time work at minimum wage

or higher, with wages and benefits similar to

those without disabilities performing the

same work, and fully integrated with

coworkers without disabilities.

Advisory Committee on Increasing Competitive Integrated Employment

for Individuals with Disabilities (ACICIEID)

INITIAL IDEAS See website for full record of committee ideas

FUNDING POLICY

Interagency funding alignment for CIE outcomes

HCBS resources aligned with CIE outcomes

Interagency policy alignment on CIE outcomes

FAMILY AND INDIVIDUALS Increase awareness

Increase expectations

Engagement

Civil rights

TRANSITION Integrated work while in schools

Family support

CMS and education alignment

Implementation Training and Technical Assistance

• Resources for state/local implementation

– HCBS guidance and CIE outcomes

• Local capacity building

• Local/state CIE implementation workforce (DSP)

• Implementation structures

• Align resources for TA to states

• Roles of Departments of Education

BUSINESS

CIE alignment and implementation with business sector

Business focused initiatives

Expand what is already working in the business community

Thank You

ACICIEID Public Input

Email:

[email protected]

Website:

www.dol.gov/odep/topics/WIOA.htm

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.dol.gov/odep/topics/WIOA.htm

Anne Raish


Department of Justice

Olmstead Enforcement

Title II of the ADA

• Prohibits discrimination by public entities in services, programs and activities

• Integration regulation requires administration of services, programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate

• Most integrated setting is one that enables people with disabilities to interact with people without disabilities to the fullest extent possible


Olmstead v. L.C.: Unjustified segregation is discrimination

• Supreme Court held that Title II prohibits unjustified segregation of people with disabilities

• Set out “two evident judgments” about institutional placement: 1. “perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so

isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life”

2. “severely diminishes the everyday life activities of individuals,” including family, work, education and social contacts


Olmstead v. L.C. (cont’d)

• Held public entities are required to provide community-based services when: – Such services are appropriate; and – Affected persons do not oppose community-based

treatment; and – Community-based treatment can be reasonably

accommodated, taking into account the resources available to the entity and the needs of others receiving disability services


Olmstead is a top priority for DOJ’s Civil Rights Division

• “Year of Community Living” – "The Olmstead ruling . . . articulat[ed] one of the most

fundamental rights of Americans with disabilities: Having the choice to live independently. [T]his initiative reaffirms my Administration’s commitment to vigorous enforcement of civil rights for Americans with disabilities and to ensuring the fullest inclusion of all people in the life of our nation.” President Obama June 22, 2009

• DOJ Olmstead enforcement efforts – 50+ matters in 25 states


When is the ADA’s Integration Mandate Implicated?

• Not limited to state-run facilities/programs • Applies when government programs result in

unjustified segregation by: – Operating facilities/programs that segregate people

with disabilities – Financing the segregation of people with disabilities in

private placements – Promoting segregation through planning, service

design, funding choices, or practices.


Who Does the Integration Mandate Cover?

• ADA and Olmstead are not limited to individuals already in institutions or other segregated settings

• They also extend to people at serious risk of institutionalization or segregation – Example: people with urgent needs on waitlists for

services or people subject to cuts in community services leading to the person’s unnecessary institutionalization.


Important Principles

• Not just about moving people out of institutional settings; focus on creating integrated, quality community alternatives

• Ensure that people have opportunities for integration in all aspects of their lives – where they live and how they spend their days

• Engagement of a range of stakeholders – consumers, families, advocates, providers – is essential to successful outcomes 2015 Summer Leadership Institute

Important Principles (cont’d)

• Access to a range of quality community services, integrated housing, and integrated employment and day activities are critical to success of Olmstead efforts – Cross-agency collaboration with DOJ, HUD and HHS

regarding community services and housing – Cross-agency collaboration with DOJ, HHS, DOL, and

DoEd regarding employment and integrated day activities


Segregated Days

– Lane v. Kitzhaber/U.S. v. Oregon: • Court decision on motion to dismiss found that

ADA and Olmstead applies to all government services, programs and activities, including employment. Rejected argument that only applies to residential services and programs.

– Settlements in VA, DE, NC and GA– Include an expansion of supported employment & integrated day activities as part of system wide relief.


U.S. v. Rhode Island - Landmark Settlement Agreement

• Relief for 3,250 individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

• Opportunities for real employment in the community at competitive wages, and integrated day activities for non-work hours.


U.S. v. Rhode Island – DOJ Findings

• State of Rhode Island violated the ADA and Olmstead by failing to serve individuals with I/DD in the most integrated day activity service setting appropriate for their needs, and by placing transition-age youth at serious risk of segregation.


U.S. v. Rhode Island Consent Decree

• Transitions 2,000 people with intellectual and developmental disabilities now in sheltered workshops or facility-based day programs, or who have recently left high school, to real jobs in the community over 10 years if they so choose.



Integrated Employment means:

• Individualized, typical jobs in the community.

• Earning at least minimum wage.

• Working among peers without disabilities for the maximum hours consistent with a person’s abilities and preferences.


U.S. v. Rhode Island – Consent Decree

• Requires Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) to adopt an employment first policy, making work in integrated employment settings a priority service option for youth.

• Youth get to try out trial work experiences, and an array of other services to ensure that they have meaningful opportunities to work in the community after they exit school.



• All persons receiving supported employment placements will also be provided with integrated non-work services.

• Integrated day services allow persons with I/DD to engage in self-directed recreational, social, educational, cultural, and athletic activities, including community volunteer activities and training activities.


CROSS-AGENCY WORK

• “Curb Cuts to the Middle Class” Initiative -Federal agency partners working to mobilize and coordinate

federal efforts to increase integrated competitive employment for people with disabilities and to support the integration of agency efforts to break down barriers to middle class employment of people with disabilities

• Community Employment Working Group – DOJ, HHS, SSA, DOL, DoEd, EEOC collaboration to improve

employment outcomes for people with disabilities • Department of Labor

– ODEP initiatives to expand supported employment


Guidance and Website

• Statement of the Department of Justice on Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead v. L.C. (June 22, 2011)

• Website: www.ada.gov/olmstead – All settlement agreements, findings letters, briefs, guidance,

testimony, speeches, etc.

• Faces of Olmstead: People affected by DOJ’s Olmstead enforcement work


http://www.ada.gov/olmstead

Contact Information

Anne Raish

Deputy Chief

Disability Rights Section

Civil Rights Division [email protected]

202-305-1321


mailto:[email protected]

Anthony Antosh

Once upon a time

In a place called Rhode Island

Advocates, Providers, State Agencies

Were all on the same side

History 1907 – Rhode Island School for the Feeble-minded

1954 – Providence Gas House Gang – RI ARC

1964 – 1978 Eight ARC Centers

1976 – Lasimone v. Garrahy

1982 – Admission Closed

1994 – Last Person leaves Ladd

1980 – Building the Community

History

1980 – 2004 – Focus on Quality of Life

2000 – Self Directed Budgets and Services

2006 – Last DD Director

2006 – Consolidation of DD into EOHHS – Global Medicaid Waiver

2009 – 2012 – 20% Budget Reductions

2010 – Project Sustainability – Unbundling Services

2013 – DOJ comes to Rhode Island

2011 2012 2013 2014

Integrated Paid Employment

799 – 22.6%

601 – 18.6%

550 – 19.1%

688 – 21.2%

Facility Based Employment

919 – 25.9%

839 – 25.9%

568 – 19.7%

420 – 13%

Community Based Non Work

1776 – 50.1%

1746 – 54%

1879 – 65.2%

2114 – 65.3%

Facility Based Non Work

2143 – 60.5%

2572 – 79.5%

1989 – 69%

2035 – 62.8%

Program for Elderly Persons

204 – 5.8%

84 – 2.6$

119 – 4.1%

254 – 7.8%

Individual Integrated

Employment

Group Integrated

Employment

2011

567 – 58.4%

310 – 41.6%

2012

383 – 63.7%

218 – 36.3%

2013

322 – 58.5%

228 – 41.5%

2015

514 – 74.7%

174 – 25.3%

Age Group Percent

19-29 24.7%

30-39 19.6%

40-49 18.3%

50-59 19.2%

60+ 18.1%

Barriers to Implementation

Resources – Redesign of Rate Structure Regulation Reform Lack of operational models for (a) those who are likely to be employed in the coming year and (b) those who will be employed in two-nine years Lack of clarity re: meaningful activity during non work times Embedding employment into person-centered plans Family expectations and knowledge Capacity of employment staff and other staff

Conversion Institute

Coaching organizations eligible for trust funds through (a) self-study, (b) development of five year plan, (c) application for trust fund dollars, (d) implementation of five year plan. Coaching other organizations through (a) self-study, (b) development of five year plan, (c) implementation of five year plan. Family Engagement – Developing Expectations and Knowledge Continuing ACRE approved training


Structural Components of Model(s) Support for adults already employed Employment Team – supports/training for those adults who will be employed shortly Evidence-Based Practices for those adults who will be employed in the next two-five years. Basic Model includes three phases – six-ten short term situational experiences (visits, job shadowing, on line career exploration, etc.); two-three internships; specific training and placement. Core concept – Person-centered choice must be based on a breadth of experiences with jobs/careers that are actually available in individual’s home community and that match the individual’s personal capacities.


Systems Issues to be Resolved Direct Support Professionals Crisis – recruitment, training, retention Staffing Patterns Developing Person-Centered Plans that embed the core models Using data to guide decision making Repurposing current buildings Transportation


Data Collection Sherlock Center Employment Survey – updated quarterly

Organization Survey re: staff training and capacity

Fidelity of implementation of core models

National Core Indicators – 20% sample of every organization

Questions and Discussion

national trends in employment for individuals · anne raish; special legal counsel, united states...

Documents