Pre-employment transition and vocational rehabilitation services: Experiences in response to Vermont’s work-based learning program

1.1Pre-ETS implementation and challenges

Pre-ETS include five required services: counseling on opportunities for enrollment in comprehensive transition or postsecondary educational programs, instruction in self-advocacy, counseling on job exploration, work-based learning experiences (WBLEs), and workplace readiness training. These services stand apart from the services that VR agencies offered historically. People who apply to VR, are assessed as eligible for services, and establish an individualized plan for employment can use VR services to achieve their specific employment goals. Pre-ETS offers a broad but limited set of services to encourage youths’ transition from school to employment and education during young adulthood. The evidence supporting these five services is positive, though much of the research is derived from correlational or qualitative analyses or reflects an intervention that included the service as a package of other services (Frentzel et al., 2021).

Pre-ETS has strengthened the role of VR agencies in the transition process. Recent studies show the shifts toward serving youth and young adults that VR agencies have made by providing pre-ETS. Before WIOA, the percentage of VR users younger than age 24 was roughly one-third (RSA, 2020). In program year 2018 (after WIOA implementation), the percentage increased to more than half of VR service users, and students with disabilities represented more than one-third of VR caseloads. Moreover, that share of students with disabilities did not reflect potentially eligible students who used pre-ETS (those students who had not applied for VR services, but are presumed eligible), which may establish a gateway for students to apply to VR agencies for additional services. Pre-ETS are often provided directly by VR agency staff, though agencies more frequently use purchased services for WBLEs (Honeycutt et al., 2019). A review of state plans intended to identify content related to pre-ETS showed that agencies, in their attempt to address WIOA requirements, have focused on improving the employment skills of students; developing opportunities that emphasize community-based employment; and building partnerships with employers, local education agencies, postsecondary education institutions, and families (Taylor et al., 2021).

VR agency staff have encountered numerous challenges in offering pre-ETS to students. The roles of VR counselors can involve working more with youth and schools than with adults, and the increased number of students who are potentially eligible has had corresponding effects on caseloads, paperwork burdens, and time management (Fabian et al., 2018). RSA (2020) documented other fiscal and operational challenges of implementing pre-ETS requirements, including agencies moving into an order of selection because of increased demands in serving youth and shifting resources to students with disabilities from the broader adult population (limiting VR services to all people with disabilities within a state).

1.2The Linking Learning to Careers demonstration program

The Vermont Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) (which recently changed its name to HireAbility Vermont) built on its existing transition program to offer services to high school students through the Linking Learning to Careers (LLC) demonstration program. DVR designed the program to emphasize work-based learning experiences (WBLE) and provide an individualized approach to promoting students’ confidence and planning for their futures. RSA funded DVR to implement and evaluate LLC as one of five RSA-sponsored demonstration projects that evaluated models of early work experiences for students with disabilities.

LLC leveraged DVR’s usual services for high school students to emphasize unpaid and paid WBLEs in integrated environments. Usual services comprise those services that are typically available to students, such as pre-employment transition services and (for those who are eligible) employment and training services. LLC also provided college exploration and coursework opportunities at the Community College of Vermont, team-based guidance and support from VR staff, dedicated assistive technology support, and additional transportation funding to support participation. To facilitate WBLE opportunities and service delivery, DVR funded transition counselors, career consultants, and youth employment specialists, some of whom only worked LLC caseloads, in each of its 12 district offices. Only LLC participants (treatment group youth) could access LLC-specific services and staff, and they could use other pre-ETS and services as VR clients. (All participants could access pre-employment transition services, but only participants with an open DVR case were eligible for other DVR services). Youth in the control group could access usual DVR services but did not have access to LLC-specific services or the dedicated staff who were part of the program. Table 1 shows the DVR services available to treatment group youth (LLC services) and control group youth (that is, usual services) (Martin et al., 2021; Sevak et al., 2021).

From April 2017 to December 2018, DVR recruited 803 students with disabilities to participate in the LLC demonstration. Using a random assignment process, DVR assigned 413 students to the treatment group with access to enhanced LLC services and 390 to a control group with access to usual services. DVR staff conducted initial outreach for LLC enrollment to high school students who were already using DVR services, whether eligible or presumed eligible for VR; these youth typically had individualized education programs or Section 504 plans. Later, they expanded the pool to high school students not yet enrolled with DVR but who met the same eligibility requirements. The LLC evaluation tracked services and outcomes through the first 24 months after enrollment, though students could continue to use DVR services after that point.

This paper does not present findings on the impacts of the LLC demonstration, but instead takes a closer look at service patterns of youth in the treatment and control groups to understand better how youth typically used pre-ETS and VR services. The LLC impact evaluation found that (1) LLC had a large impact on VR service use in the two years after youth enrolled, particularly those services that LLC intended; (2) LLC increased participation in postsecondary education by 8 percentage points; and (3) LLC did not affect employment for all participants within the first 24 months of program enrollment, though it increased the likelihood of earnings among later enrollees by 11 percentage points. These findings were limited in that they only used a 24-month window from enrollment, and many enrollees had not yet completed high school. Full details of the LLC evaluation can be found in Martin et al. (2021) and Sevak et al. (2021).

1.3Study objectives

This study relies on data from DVR and the LLC program evaluation to answer three questions related to patterns of service use and resulting outcomes:

The answers to these questions fill gaps in our knowledge regarding how high school students access pre-ETS and VR services (that is, what are their service patterns), which youth use which services, how a transition program can affect the service patterns, and differences in early outcomes according to service patterns.

2.1Sample

This study examines the 803 high school students who signed up for the LLC demonstration. Participants’ characteristics at the time of random assignment to the treatment and control groups were largely similar (Table 2). A majority of participants were White, about 60 percent identified as male, and just over half were enrolled in grades 11 or 12. The most common disability types included learning disabilities and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Nearly a fifth of participants received income from the Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance programs. One-third of participants had a paid job when they enrolled. The few small differences in characteristics between the treatment and control groups (about 3 to 5 percentage points) were not statistically significant.

Participants were similar to youth with disabilities ages 14 to 18 in Vermont and the United States across most characteristics, but they differed in potentially meaningful ways. Compared with youth with disabilities in Vermont, a slightly higher share of students in the demonstration were non-White or of Hispanic ethnicity. The percentage of participants reporting employment experience (33 percent) was substantially higher than the 24 percent employment rate among youth with disabilities in Vermont (based on our calculations from the 2017 and 2018 American Community Survey); this difference might reflect the motivations of youth interested in the LLC demonstration or youth who typically use pre-ETS and VR services (from which the program largely drew its sample). Differences by race and employment are even more pronounced when comparing demonstration participants with similarly aged youth with disabilities in the United States. The percentage of participants reporting a particular disability was higher than the percentage in published statistics on students with disabilities in Vermont (Vermont Agency of Education, 2016) and nationally (National Center for Education Statistics, 2021), but this finding could be because of measurement differences. The LLC baseline survey allowed students to report multiple disabilities, and education statistics report mutually exclusive categories, grouping students with multiple disabilities in one category.

2.2Data

This analysis draws on four data sources for information on demonstration assignment, youth and family characteristics, DVR involvement, and earnings outcomes. LLC enrollment data identify which participants LLC randomized to the treatment and control groups, their application dates, and the district office associated with their applications. Youth and families completed web-based baseline surveys at enrollment that contained almost 50 items. Along with the characteristics shown in Table 2, the surveys also collected information about other demographic and disability characteristics, employment history, expectations for the future, and information about their parents. DVR administrative data are service records input by DVR staff about application, service, and outcomes related to a person’s DVR involvement. From these data, we identified participants’ use of vocational and rehabilitative services from April 2017 to June 2021. These data include all 803 demonstration participants and represent services used by youth (including purchased services) and VR agency milestones (such as application and eligibility dates). Finally, we analyzed Vermont unemployment insurance data for earnings outcomes, which contain quarterly earnings as reported by employers to the state. DVR obtained these data from the Vermont Department of Labor for the 638 demonstration participants who provided Social Security numbers to DVR at the time of random assignment.

2.3Measures

We use three types of measures in our analysis: youth and family characteristics, DVR services and milestones, and earnings outcomes.

2.4Analytical approach

This exploratory analysis relies on two analytical approaches to answer the study’s research questions. First, we use descriptive statistics, such as counts, means, and percentages, to document youth and family characteristics, DVR services and milestones, and earnings outcomes. Second, we use t-tests and chi-square tests to assess which youth and family characteristics are significantly associated with selected outcomes and whether the treatment and control groups differed in their service patterns.

3.1Service patterns for control and treatment group youth

Similar shares of control and treatment group youth began their involvement with the demonstration after having some exposure to DVR (Fig. 1). Most youth were pre-application students, so they had access to pre-ETS before enrollment. The remainder of enrollees had no prior DVR involvement or had an open VR case; the proportions of both groups were roughly similar, indicating that the control and treatment groups youth had comparable engagement with DVR before LLC enrollment.

Fig. 1

DVR involvement at enrollment and during the 24 months after enrollment. This figure shows the proportion of treatment (N = 413) and control (N = 390) youth according to their DVR service involvement at enrollment and 24 months after enrollment.

Though control and treatment group youth had similar DVR statuses at enrollment, more treatment group youth used pre-ETS and VR services in the 24 months after enrollment than did control group youth (Fig. 1). Among all control group youth, more than half only used pre-ETS, and one-quarter also received VR services under an individualized plan for employment (and might have also used pre-ETS). In addition, 22 percent did not use any VR services. In contrast, nearly all treatment group youth used some VR service, and a majority (59 percent) used both VR services and pre-ETS. Five percent of treatment group youth did not use any services from DVR. These results indicate that although the treatment and control groups had similar eligibility for VR services and pre-ETS at enrollment, LLC involvement brought with it greater engagement in pre-ETS and VR services relative to the control group.

3.2Individual characteristics related to pre-ETS

The pre-ETS usage rates for control group youth suggest substantial differences in the types of youth who used pre-ETS. Among control group youth, those who used pre-ETS differed from those who did not by gender, disability type, employment, and service receipt characteristics (Table 3). Males, for example, represented 71 percent of control group youth who did not use pre-ETS and 56 percent of those who did, a difference of 14 percentage points. Control group youth who used pre-ETS were 10 percentage points less likely to be employed at enrollment, 9 percentage points more likely to report an autism spectrum disorder, and 15 percentage points more likely to receive special education services, relative to their counterparts who did not use pre-ETS.

Youth in the treatment group had no significant differences in the characteristics of those who used pre-ETS and those who did not (Table 3). The lack of differences reflects the LLC program’s intent to connect most program youth to pre-ETS, but it could also result from the small number of youth (N = 28) who used no services (that is, a few differences between those who did and did not use pre-ETS were 10 percentage points or higher, but were not statistically significant). The program’s additional resources, such as dedicated staff to connect with youth and service offerings, could have appealed more widely to the needs of youth, thus resulting in the large number of youth using pre-ETS.

3.3Patterns of pre-ETS use

Most pre-ETS users in the control group used job exploration counseling services, with the group evenly split between the number of pre-ETS types that they used (Table 4). Nearly four in five control group youth used job exploration counseling services, and about half received counseling on enrollment opportunities. Less than 40 percent of control group members used other pre-ETS types. Control group youth who used pre-ETS were roughly equally divided by whether they used a single pre-ETS type, two types, or three or more types.

LLC affected how youth used pre-ETS. Though the most frequent pre-ETS type remained job exploration counseling, most treatment group youth also used WBLEs or counseling on enrollment opportunities (Table 4). Treatment group youth were significantly more likely to use those three services than control group youth, which reflects LLC’s service model to connect youth with various kinds of pre-ETS. Rates for the use of instruction in self-advocacy and workplace readiness training were no different from the rates for control group youth. Nearly 60 percent of treatment group pre-ETS users engaged with three or more types of pre-ETS, a significantly larger share than that of control group youth.

3.4Individual characteristics related to VR service use

The composition of control group youth with VR service use differed from control group youth without VR service use by gender, grade level, and disability type. The largest difference occurred by grade level. Almost three-fourths (71 percent) of VR service users were in grades 11 or 12, whereas only 47 percent of those who did not use VR services were, a difference of 23 percentage points. Fewer VR service users were male (17 percentage points) or had a learning disability diagnosis (14 percentage points), and more VR service users had a sensory disability diagnosis (9 percentage points), relative to youth who did not use VR services (Table 5). Notably, there were no statistically significant differences between youth who did and did not use VR services by race or ethnicity, parent or guardian background, most disability types, Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance status, or employment.

Compared with control group youth, treatment group youth who did and did not use VR services only differed along one characteristic. More treatment group youth who used VR services were in grades 11 or 12 (by 14 percentage points) relative to those who did not use VR services; this difference is much smaller than that observed for control group members (Table 5). This pattern suggests that LLC led to an increase in service use among some groups who would otherwise have had lower participation rates.

3.5Earnings outcomes by service patterns

Most control group youth had earnings, no matter their pre-ETS and DVR involvement. Control group youth had an average of three earnings quarters across the first eight quarters after enrollment, and 61 percent had earnings in at least one quarter (Table 6). Among those using specific pre-ETS, youth who used WBLEs had the highest average quarters with earnings (3.6 quarters) and any quarters of earnings (71 percent). Other youth whose earnings outcomes were higher than average included those who used both pre-ETS and VR services, used counseling on enrollment opportunities, or used two of the five pre-ETS types.

Treatment and control group youth had similar earnings outcomes (Table 6). Treatment group youth had an average of three earnings quarters, and 66 percent had earnings in at least one of the eight quarters after the enrollment quarter. Treatment group youth who used WBLEs or who only used one pre-ETS type had among the highest earnings outcomes relative to other types of DVR involvement. Unlike the control group youth, treatment group youth had similar earnings outcomes for those who used both pre-ETS and VR services and those who used pre-ETS only. (Among control group youth, the former group had higher rates than the latter group.)

The variation in earnings outcomes across youth with different DVR involvement should not be interpreted as causal. The observed relationships between service use and outcomes might be attributable to the observable and unobservable characteristics of youth, such as need, opportunity, motivation, or parental support, as well as local labor markets that are correlated with service use and outcomes.

4.1Limitations

Readers should consider four limitations as they interpret the findings of this study. First, this study uses data from a single VR agency, which could limit the generalizability of some results. Second, the LLC program emphasized WBLEs and so likely attracted students with disabilities whose interest in employment was stronger than the interests of the broader group of all students with disabilities. Most students were connected to DVR in some manner before enrolling in LLC, and one-third had previous employment experience. The findings may not generalize to a broader group of students with disabilities that includes those with no previous VR agency engagement. Third, we examine service patterns and outcomes only for the first 24 months after LLC enrollment. Because most youth were still enrolled in high school, this window might be too short to draw firm conclusions about how the patterns relate to earnings outcomes. The final limitation reflects our descriptive analytic approach to answering its research questions and the relatively small sample for some subgroups, which affects the interpretation of the results (that is, the results are not causal and we have limited power to detect effects).

4.2Policy and program implications

VR agency administrators, staff, and clients, along with community members and advocates interested in VR, face multiple decisions regarding the programs and services for students and other youth with disabilities. The findings from this study provide some insight into three core questions that VR administrators and others interested in youth transition might ask.