One of the emerging funding opportunities for independent living centers is the establishment of a temporary employment program.  This article examines the issues involved in establishing temporary employment as a service. Three independent living centers that have attempted to include temporary employment in their repertoires of services include: Austin Resource Center for Independent Living (Austin, Texas), Arizona Bridge to Independent Living (Phoenix, Arizona), and Valley Association for Independent Living (Rio Grande Valley area of Texas). The factors that have contributed to successes and failures in these programs were analyzed. Information concerning these centers was acquired through interviews with staff members and written materials, where available.

Historical Issues

Employment services of various types have been included in some independent living centers since the very early years of the independent living movement. Employment has consistently been acknowledged as an important option for increasing independence for persons with disabilities (Thayer and Rice, 1990). Moreover, temporary employment has been traditionally viewed by service providers in independent living and rehabilitation programs, as well as by the general public, as being a good route to permanent employment for many people.

In 1992, Means and Boulton published results of a national survey of employment services provided by independent living centers and programs. That effort documented that many independent living centers and related independent living programs did indeed include employment services in their programs of service. The study involved a survey of 104 independent living programs (approximately 33 percent of the independent living programs in existence in the United States at that time). Representatives in the sample included all Department of Health, Education, and Welfare regions, 47 states, the District of Columbia, and Pago Pago. The survey included both urban and rural centers and centers of all sizes.

. . .  It is clear that employment is a part of the services offered by many centers.  It is also clear that some centers have a number of years of experience in providing such services. . .

Among the findings were the following:

Twenty-five percent of the centers  reported investing a significant amount of program resources in the provision of employment services. An additional 35 percent of the sample reported some involvement in the provision of employment services. A total of 60 percent had at least some involvement in employment services.

Although a wide variety of employment-related services were offered, centers differed as to whether these were a major or minor part of their program efforts. The following percentages indicate centers with at least a minor involvement in various employment services:

From the Means and Boulton study, it is clear that employment is a part of the services offered by many centers. It is also clear that some centers have a number of years of experience in providing such services and that the range of employment services offered by centers covers a broad spectrum.

Temporary Employment Programs

In recent years, some centers have attempted to develop temporary employment programs with mixed results. In some instances, these attempts have been quite successful in accomplishing their objectives. In others, successes have been few and the barriers of considerable magnitude. The following discussion of three centers’ experiences in providing temporary employment services reflects the issues that must be addressed in planning and providing such services.

With careful planning and evaluation, centers can decide whether offering temporary employment services would contribute to the economic well-being of the center, as well as, the "independent" well-being of the consumers they serve.

Austin Resource Center for Independent Living (ARCIL)

ARCIL was established in 1980 and, in the ensuing years, it has been a very successful center with a stable administrative and program staff. It has maintained an employment component throughout its history as well as a full complement of traditional independent living services. ARCIL is funded through Title VII of the Rehabilitation Act , as well as, state independent living funds and a wide variety of other resources. It is located in Austin, Texas, and serves a metropolitan area of approximately one million people with an ethnically diverse population. It should also be noted that Austin has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the nation, just slightly over two percent.

In 1998, ARCIL received a grant from the Dole Foundation to establish a temporary employment program. Although the temporary employment program was a separate service component, it fit nicely with the other employment services offered by the center. ARCIL viewed the program as a transition between assessment, training, and direct placement.  It was very effective in helping consumers focus their career goals.

In initiating the service, ARCIL negotiated a contract with Evins Personnel Consultants, Inc., a company offering a wide range of employment services, including temporary employment. Evins was selected because of its success in this field, its extensive base of employers in the Austin area, and its history of championing employment programs for women. ARCIL and Evins developed a very effective working relationship.

The contract initially provided for a $50.00 per person assessment fee paid by ARCIL to Evins. This was subsequently waived as the program progressed. Evins made its profit from its usual fees charged to employers. Evins operates an employee-leasing program and consumers referred by ARCIL were served through that program. They were employees of Evins and the employers paid fees for their services. Consumers earned an average of $7.00 per hour and those pursuing clerical and computer jobs did particularly well.

ARCIL viewed the program as a transition between assessment, training, and direct placement.  It was very effective in helping consumers focus their career goals.

Both ARCIL and Evins assessed all consumers prior to being referred for employment. The ARCIL assessments focused upon work attitudes, employment interests, transportation issues, and other related issues. They also included vocational assessments provided through a contractual arrangement with Capitol City Rehabilitation Group. The Evins assessments focused upon readiness and skill levels for specific jobs. ARCIL also provided training, as appropriate, in their Computer Learning Lab and some consumers received training in the computer lab of the Criss Cole Center, a project of the Texas Commission for the Blind. Similarly, Evins allowed consumers to upgrade their skills with specific software in their computer lab.

One of the most important early program activities was an intensive marketing campaign. ARCIL used television, radio, and newspapers in this effort and followed up with press releases throughout the duration of the program. Five television stations and four print media resources in the Austin area provided information about the program during the early phase of its development. Numerous presentations were also made to human service agencies in the area. These included the Texas Commission for the Blind, the Texas Rehabilitation Commission, the Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, the Texas Department of Human Services, the University of Texas Office for Students with Disabilities, independent school districts in the area, and numerous other agencies and organizations.

Interviews with both administrative and program staff revealed the following benefits and problem areas related to provision of this service:

Benefits

Flexible work schedules have allowed consumers time off work for medical appointments and related activities.
Temporary employment has provided a good opportunity to assess consumers’ stamina and potential readiness for permanent employment.
For many consumers, temporary employment has provided a good transition to permanent jobs.
Temporary employment has also provided consumers with practical work experience to increase their skill levels and to better focus their career goals.
Evins has assisted in coordinating consumers’ work hours with available transportation resources.
Reasonable accommodations in the workplace have been necessary in some cases and ARCIL has found employers generally willing to make the necessary accommodations at no cost to the consumer or ARCIL.
In other cases, assistive technology has been necessary and in those cases it has readily been provided by other  service agencies such as the Commission for the Blind.

Problem Areas

The scope of available temporary jobs has not been as great as some consumers would have liked.
A small number of consumers have had previous negative experiences with Evins and that has impacted their success in the temporary employment program.
Available grant funding has been considered insufficient by ARCIL to adequately maintain the program.

The program was continued for approximately nine months under grant funding and then was incorporated into ARCIL’s other employment services. During that time, the program received 58 consumer inquiries from a wide variety of referral sources. Of the referrals coming from community human service agencies, the majority came from the Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation and the next largest number from the Commission for the Blind. Intakes were processed for 37 consumers and 72 percent of consumers were placed in temporary employment. 62 percent of those placements were in full-time employment. Perhaps most importantly, the majority of the consumers placed in temporary employment subsequently entered permanent employment.

Arizona Bridge to Independent Living (ABIL)

ABIL was founded in 1981 as an outgrowth of a previous community-based, consumer organization that had been established in 1977.  It utilizes Title VII funding through the Rehabilitation Act, as well as, a variety of public and private funds from other sources. A wide array of independent living and employment services is available through the center. It serves the Phoenix, Arizona area, an area with a metropolitan population of approximately three million and a low unemployment rate (approximately four percent). The ethnic makeup of the area is approximately 25 percent Hispanic, 25 percent African American, 50 percent Caucasian, and various other groups.

The center has had very stable leadership and a stable staff over the years. For example, the President of the Board of Directors has been involved with the center since 1977; the Executive Director has been in that position for seven years; and the Director of Employment Services has been with the center for fifteen years. This factor has resulted in stable and consistent leadership in developing and managing the center’s programs.

In 1993, ABIL initiated a temporary employment program to augment its other employment services. Contracts were developed with two private employment agencies. Under the contracts, these agencies paid ABIL for consumers referred but they differed in regard to consumer assessment. One contract had the agency assess consumers in terms of their skill levels and readiness for temporary employment. Under the other contract, ABIL assessed consumers’ skill levels and readiness for temporary employment. Consumers were, in fact, employees of the employment agencies and employers paid a fee for their services to the employment agencies.

The program was marketed through a wide variety of resources – public service announcements on radio, television, and in newspapers. Numerous community contacts were also made with state, county, city, and private organizations that might serve as referral sources. These included the Department of Developmental Disabilities, the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, city agencies such as the “one stop centers” offering return-to-work services, and the private contractor providing welfare-to-work services. Particular emphasis was placed upon reaching the minority communities and the lower socioeconomic areas of the city and surrounding areas.

. . . The most important activities for success in temporary employment programs are partnering, networking, and communication . . .

ABIL joined the Arizona Association of Temporary and Staffing Services.  “They taught us about the temp industry,” Executive Director, Susan Webb says.  “They enabled ABIL to serve people better.”  ABIL brought to the association their strong background in legislative advocacy.  “We brought value to them,” Webb remarks.  Beyond meeting an immediate business need, Webb says “the temporary employment agency also provided ABIL the opportunity to educate a whole new segment of the community.”

Seeing people with disabilities as competent, professional business people was a new experience for many of the association members – a worthwhile payoff, Webb says.  Another payoff is the contact with people and businesses who have helped people into jobs.

ABIL’s success as a temp agency has allowed the center to expand its business in a big way.  Fortis Benefits, representing Arizona State Retirement System, is referring long-term disability claimants to ABIL.  For $65 per hour, center staff provides services to help claimants return to work.  “Our experience and understanding of disability,” Webb offers, “makes us uniquely qualified for the job.”

ABIL has subsequently incorporated temporary employment services into its other employment programs, primarily into its Projects with Industry program. In doing so, it now utilizes its own resources for assessment and its own network of potential employers in placing consumers in temporary employment. Most of the temporary jobs have been in the areas of clerical, assembly, customer services, and call center employment. The majority of the employers have been large organizations such as Sears, Excel, Discover Card, and U-Haul.  The average consumer earnings have been $7.50 per hour.

The program has been very successful during its six years of existence. It has averaged approximately 200 consumers interviewed for the program per year and approximately 50 consumers placed in temporary employment. About 90 percent of the consumers entering temporary employment have subsequently gone into permanent employment. It should be noted that no significant problems regarding accessibility and reasonable accommodation have been encountered. The majority of employers have been sufficiently eager to fill employment slots that they have been willing to make appropriate accommodations at their expense.

ABIL staff viewed the following as program benefits and problem areas:

Benefits

Temporary employment services have addressed the needs of some consumers that could not have been adequately addressed in any other way.
This service has provided an opportunity to realistically assess consumers’ skill levels and work readiness.
The comprehensiveness of the center’s services has been enhanced, particularly the employment component.
The networking and partnering activities involved in developing and operating the programs have had a very positive impact on the center’s community activities.

Problem Areas

It has been difficult to find consumers with adequate skill levels to meet the demands of available jobs.  Many clients referred for temporary employment services have had low skill levels and a general lack of business experience.
Some difficulty has been encountered in generating referrals to the program.  For example, some state vocational rehabilitation personnel have not seen the benefit of referring consumers to the program because they consider it a duplication of the services they provide.
Some consumers referred to the program have been reluctant to work because they were afraid of losing their benefits, particularly medical benefits.

ABIL staff stressed that the most important activities for success in temporary employment programs are partnering, networking, and communication with a wide array of community resources. This is important in all aspects of the program – referral development, accessing support services, and developing a network of potential employers.

Valley Association for Independent Living (VAIL)

VAIL was established in 1988 as a community-based, consumer-controlled, independent living center in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas. It was initially funded through state independent living funds granted by the Texas Rehabilitation Commission. It subsequently acquired funding from a variety of other sources including Title VII of the Rehabilitation Act and Community Development Block Grants from cities in its area. It provides a wide range of independent living services in a largely Hispanic area (approximately 87 percent) with approximately 800,000 population. This area encompasses a large geographic area of approximately 120 miles along the border between Texas and Mexico. It is characterized by three major cities – McAllen, Harlingen, and Brownsville – with numerous smaller cities and rural areas in between. A substantial population of seasonal, part-time, winter residents from northern and mid-western states also live in the area.

In 1998, VAIL received a $25,000 grant from the Independent Living Research Utilization Program (ILRU) in Houston to develop a temporary employment program. Although it was anticipated that a wide range of disabilities would be served, particular emphasis was to be placed upon individuals with HIV and AIDS.  ILRU conducted two ADA training sessions at VAIL, one involving the entire VAIL staff and their affiliates and the other involved local employers, community leaders, VR, and  various other business related organizations.  The VAIL staff training occurred over a one and a half day period and encompassed all three titles of the ADA. Titles I and II were covered in the one day training for the business and community leaders.  The goal of this training was to join forces in training and placement of people with disabilities in the workplace.  Over ninety local employers, community leaders, and consumers were in attendance at the two and a half days of training.  In the early stages of program development, ILRU and VAIL staff jointly developed a work plan to implement the program.

The program had considerable difficulty during its implementation phase. The executive director was hospitalized for two months and could not, as a result, contribute needed leadership to the program. Staff turnover and shifting of key staff to other roles for administrative reasons also contributed to a lack of essential leadership and continuity. Consequently, because of these and other reasons discussed below, the program has experienced little success. Although attempts are still being made to revive it, these have thus far manifested little progress in meeting the program goals.

One of the first difficulties encountered was in the area of marketing. This held true with virtually all essential target groups – employers, service providers, community leaders, and consumers. Although numerous community contacts were made regarding the program, they were largely met with disinterest.

Two of the major problems we faced in trying to implement the program were high unemployment and lack of transportation resources in the large geographic area.

Employers seemed to be afraid of problems if they participated and were not willing to make work-site accommodations for temporary employees. Moreover, employers in the Valley appeared to be unsophisticated regarding ADA requirements and viewed participation in the program as a potential source of problems. This became evident when VAIL invited numerous key employers to an initial program development meeting and virtually none showed up. According to VAIL staff, employers in the Valley tend to respond to issues related to persons with disabilities only when litigation is involved. It should also be noted that the Rio Grande Valley area has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation (between 15 and 20 percent). The fact that there is considerable competition for available jobs probably also contributed to lack of employer interest.

The same lack of positive response was received from community leaders and service providers. VAIL attempted to develop a contractual relationship with both public and private employment organizations. Express Employment, a private employment service wasn’t interested and Manpower, a government agency, showed no interest in the program locally even though their national office had expressed interest in disability-related programs.

Similarly, state agencies targeted as good potential referral sources either showed little interest or cited regulations precluding their participation. In some instances, agencies expressed some level of interest in the program but never followed that expressed interest with referrals or other action. Examples of the agencies contacted are Texas Mental Health and Mental Retardation, the Rio Grande State Center, and the Texas Rehabilitation Commission.

Finally, consumers also exhibited little interest in the program. Fear of losing their benefits appeared to be the major reason. Employers in this area traditionally offer very limited employee benefits and consumers expressed fear of giving up their government benefits because they would not be replaced by employee benefits if they went to work.  VAIL administrative and program staff cited the following benefits and problem areas in the development of the program:

Benefits

Experiences related to the development of the program, although largely unsuccessful, have provided the staff with a clearer understanding of the obstacles that must be overcome in an endeavor of this type.  This experience can be applied to other program development activities of the center.
Improved working relationships with businesses in the community through ADA training.

Problem Areas

High unemployment rates in the Rio Grande Valley have resulted in a general lack of interest from employers and difficulty in placing consumers in employment.
Employment agencies, both public and private, have not been interested in a collaborative relationship with VAIL.
The lack of transportation resources for consumers, and their fear of losing federal health benefits were overwhelming.
Many of the companies moving to the Rio Grande Valley are bringing their own employees instead of creating new job opportunities for local residents.
The Rio Grande Valley is not a progressive area and many negative myths regarding HIV, AIDS, and other disabilities remain strongly entrenched.
The large geographic area of the Rio Grande Valley has made it difficult to implement the program with available staff at VAIL.

During the program’s duration, approximately 30 consumers were referred and served. Only three or four were placed in temporary employment.

Conclusions

From the experiences of these three centers, several factors appear to be important to the success or failure of temporary employment programs in independent living centers. Although many variables could impact such programming, the following appear to be among the most important:

• The rate of unemployment in the target area appears to be a critical issue. In areas of low unemployment, employers needing workers are more willing to hire persons with disabilities and make necessary accommodations to assure their success. Conversely, in areas of high unemployment, employers have many more hiring options and may be less inclined to hire persons with multiple disabilities and make work-site accommodations.
• Adequate start-up funding is necessary to assure that the program has adequate staff support to perform the activities necessary for success (marketing, networking, outreach, placement, etc.).
• Stability of administrative and key program staff is important to assure appropriate leadership and continuity in program development.
• Thorough assessments of consumer skills, career goals, and providing the necessary training are critical for successful placements.
• Networking with other community human services and employment organizations is critical to the success of temporary employment programs.   This includes local Vocational Rehabilitation agencies.
• Broad-based marketing of temporary employment services helps assure adequate referrals and employment opportunities.  Contracting with an employment agency may be helpful.
• Assuring that appropriate transportation and assistive technology resources are available is necessary in the planning phase.
• Planning should focus upon temporary employment as a transition to permanent employment for those who desire and have the ability to work on a permanent basis.

In conclusion, temporary employment services may represent a potential funding opportunity for independent living centers.  With careful planning and evaluation, centers can decide whether offering temporary employment services would contribute to the economic well-being of the center, as well as, the “independent” well-being of the consumers they serve.

References

Interview with administrative and program staff at Austin Resource Center for Independent Living (1999).

Interview with program staff at Arizona Bridge to Independent Living (1999).

Interview with administrative and program staff at Valley Association for Independent Living (1999).

Means, B., and Boulton, B. (1992).  “A National Survey of Employment Services Provided by Independent Living Programs,” Journal of Rehabilitation, 58 (4, Oct/Nov), 22-26.

Press release concerning ARCIL temporary employment program (1998).

Thayer, T., and Rice, B. (1990). “Vocational Rehabilitation Services in Independent Living Centers,” Seventeenth Annual Institute on Rehabilitation Issues. University of Arkansas, Arkansas Research & Training Center in Vocational Rehabilitation.

Unpublished LifeStep sample vocational assessment report prepared by Capitol City Rehabilitation Group for ARCIL consumers requesting temporary employment services (1998).

Unpublished quarterly and final reports to the Dole Foundation concerning the ARCIL temporary employment program (1998-1999).

The RRTC on Management of Centers for Independent Living primary objectives are to enhance the scope and quality of independent living services provided through consumer-controlled, community-based independent living centers located throughout the country.

Since 1977, ILRU has served as a national center for information, training, technical assistance, and research on independent living.  ILRU is affiliated with TIRR Systems, a corporation providing a continuum of services to people with disabilities.

Author

Ted Thayer has worked in the fields of vocational rehabilitation and independent living for more than thirty years. He has served as a Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor, Program Specialist for Neuromuscular Disabilities, and Director of Independent Living Services during a twenty-five year career with the Texas Rehabilitation Commission. For most of that time, his vocational rehabilitation responsibilities focused upon program development, consultation, staff training, and evaluation of statewide programs and services for persons with severe physical disabilities.

In 1972, he helped establish a collaborative effort between the Texas Rehabilitation Commission, The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research, the Rehabilitation Services Administration, and a group of young adults with severe physical disabilities to create one of the early independent living models in the United States—the shared attendant Director of Training services project in Houston. That project was focused upon consumer control in the management of attendant and transportation services. He subsequently wrote and managed the grants to establish the first five consumer-controlled, cross-disability, community-based independent living centers in Texas. His responsibilities also included providing technical assistance to those centers.

In recent years, he has served as Executive Director of the Brain Injury Association of Texas and is currently self-employed as a rehabilitation consultant in the forensic rehabilitation field. He has authored several publications and made numerous presentations in the fields of vocational rehabilitation and independent living.

This research is made possible through the support of the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Management of Centers for Independent Living funded by the  National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.

(Grant #133B950003)      © 1999 ILRU

Staff

Pamela Dautel, M.P.H.
Research Coordinator
Lex Frieden
Executive Director
Margaret Nosek, Ph.D.
Director of Research
Laurie Redd
Administrative Coordinator
Laurel Richards
Director of Training