Several programs have attempted to improve labor market outcomes for youth and working-age adults with disabilities. To be successful, these programs must address the various barriers to employment typically encountered by this population. This topic area focuses on research determining which programs have been most effective at improving direct labor market outcomes such as employment and earnings; improving education and health status, which may affect a person’s ability to work; and decreasing federal disability benefit receipt.
Disability Employment Policy
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1985 - 2022.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
Evidence echoes previous literature reviews on the challenges of generating substantive impacts, though customized supports to well-targeted populations show some potential.
The most effective interventions provided intensive, customized supports and services focused on job training, placement, and retention to narrowly defined target populations.
Interventions that provided support services or incentives to help beneficiaries keep more of their benefits when working had small or no impacts on employment, even if spending on services was high.
There is no evidence of SSI or SSDI caseload reductions, even among interventions that improved employment and/or earnings.
Little is known about interventions for improving earnings of people with TBI and PTSD.
Recruiting beneficiaries to participate in demonstrations was difficult, which limited the generalizability of study findings.
Fidelity to the demonstration model is important.
Work incentives and supports can be difficult to implement in the context of SSA’s existing work incentives, creating potential confusion for beneficiaries and program staff.
A strong technical assistance component, with incentives for service providers to accept the assistance, is important to successful implementation.
Demonstrations should be pilot tested before being implemented on a national scale.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Putting Your Best Foot Forward: Job Search Skills Training for Youth with Visual Impairments on employment. The study was a nonexperimental design…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services on employment outcomes. The study uses a nonexperimental design to compare employment outcomes of youth with…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the comparative impacts of Social Enterprise Intervention (SEI) and Individual Placement and Support (IPS) on employment and earnings. The study is a randomized…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of AgrAbility projects on health outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the quality of life (QOL) scores and independent living…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
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…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Behavioral Activation therapy with a goal of returning to work (BA-W) on employment and health outcomes. The study used an interrupted time series…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Youth Transition Demonstration (YTD) project on public benefits receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the study…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Youth Transition Demonstration (YTD) project on public benefits receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the study…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Youth Transition Demonstration (YTD) project on public benefits receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the study…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Youth Transition Demonstration (YTD) project on public benefits receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the study…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.