Skip to main content

Longitudinal outcomes of Project SEARCH in upstate New York (Christensen et al., 2015)

Review Guidelines

Absence of conflict of interest. 

Citation

Christensen, J., Hetherington, S., Daston, M., & Riehle, E. (2015). Longitudinal outcomes of Project SEARCH in upstate New York. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 42(3), 247-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JVR-150746

Highlights

  • The study's objective was to examine the impact of Project SEARCH on employment and wage outcomes. 
  • The authors used an interrupted time series to examine the outcomes of emerging adults with disabilities before and after they completed Project SEARCH using employment and wage data collected at intake, at program completion, and every 6 months for up to 4 years. 
  • The study found that Project SEARCH completion was associated with employment and wage increases. However, the study did not include tests of significance. 
  • This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that any estimated effects are attributable to Project SEARCH; other factors are likely to have contributed.  

Intervention Examined

Project SEARCH

Features of the Intervention

Project SEARCH was developed in Cincinnati in 1990 and implemented in other areas, including Monroe County, New York. The intervention is characterized by a collaborative approach between educators, employers, and vocational rehabilitation providers. Project SEARCH included an internship, job coaching, and additional support and mentorship from teachers and coworkers. In Monroe County, the program included retail, healthcare, and government employers who also provided the coaching services. The target population for the program was people with disabilities aged 18-21 in the local public school system. Small, annual cohorts of students were admitted to the program based on an application process focused on need, eligibility, and additional support available for the student.  

Features of the Study

This study was conducted at three sites in Monroe County, New York. The authors used an interrupted time series to examine the outcomes of emerging adults with disabilities before and after they completed Project SEARCH. The sample included 124 individuals who completed the program between 2009 and 2014. Over half of the sample was male (55%), 32% were Black, 66% were White, and 2% were Asian. The most represented disability was intellectual disability (38%), followed by autism spectrum disorder (14%), multiple disabilities (13%), and learning disabilities (12%). The study used employment and wage data collected at intake, at program completion, and every 6 months for up to four years. The data were provided by employer partners. The authors examined employment and wages over time. No tests of statistical significance were provided. 

Findings

Employment 

  • The study found that at one-year post-intervention, 82% of program completers were employed. At four years post-intervention, 44% of program completers remained employed.  
  • The study found that the number of hours worked also increased over time. At four years post-intervention, program completers were working at least 37.5 hours per week. 

Earnings and wages 

  • The study found that wages were flat during the first year but steadily increased over time. At four years post-intervention, the average hourly wage was $11.24.

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The authors compared the outcomes of participants measured before and after they participated in the intervention. The authors do not provide pre-intervention trends. CLEAR’s guidelines require that the authors observe outcomes for multiple periods before the intervention to rule out the possibility that participants had increasing or decreasing trends in the outcomes examined before enrollment in the program. Without knowing the trends before program enrollment, we cannot rule this out. Therefore, the study receives a low causal evidence rating. 

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not account for trends in outcomes before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Project SEARCH; other factors are likely to have contributed.  

Reviewed by CLEAR

January 2024