School-to-work program participation and the post-high school employment of young adults with disabilities.

NIH Public Access Author Manuscript J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as: J Vocat Rehabil. 2008 ; 29(2): 117–130.

School-to-work program participation and the post-high school employment of young adults with disabilities Carrie L. Shandra* and Dennis P. Hogan Brown University, Department of Sociology/Population Studies and Training Center, Providence, RI, USA

Abstract


Previous research on the education-to-employment transition for students with disabilities has suggested that participation in school-to-work programs is positively associated with post-high school success. This article utilizes data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) to extend these findings in several ways. First, we assess the efficacy of specific types of school-based and work-based initiatives, including job shadowing, mentoring, cooperative education, school-sponsored enterprise, technical preparation, internships, and career major. Next, we extend the usual focus on the employment outcomes of work status and financial compensation to consider job-specific information on the receipt of fringe benefits. Overall, results from longitudinal multivariate analyses suggest that transition initiatives are effective in facilitating vocational success for this population; however, different aspects of school-to-work programs are beneficial for different aspects of employment. School-based programs are positively associated with stable employment and full-time work while work-based programs most consistently increase the likelihood that youth with disabilities will be employed in jobs that provide fringe benefits. Analyses also indicate that – once individuals with disabilities are stably employed – they can be employed in “good” jobs that provide employee benefits.

Keywords


School to work; youth with disabilities; adolescence; transition to adulthood; program participation; employment

1. Introduction The successful movement from education to employment is crucial for establishing independence among young adults with disabilities. To address this critical transition in the life course, several federal and state policies have provided funding for school-to-work programs. While previous (and mostly cross-sectional) research suggests that participation in these initiatives can facilitate later and more lucrative employment among this population, students with disabilities remain less likely to work – and less likely to receive employment benefits – than students without disabilities [9]. Given this persistent attainment gap and the

© 2008 - IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved * Address for correspondence: Carrie L. Shandra, Department of Sociology, Brown University, Box 1916, 112 George Street, Providence, RI 02912, USA. Tel.: +1 508 344 4483; Fax: +1 401 863 3213; [email protected].

Shandra and Hogan

Page 2


potential of school-to-work programs to address important transition goals, several questions remain: Does participation in school-to-work programs affect a young adult's employment over time? Does participation affect the type of employment and the type of benefits offered from this employment? Finally – and perhaps most importantly – which specific schoolbased or work-based programs are most effective in facilitating post-high school employment success?


This paper uses data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) to examine these questions among a sample of young adults with disabilities. The content and design of NLSY97 allow us to supplement the current transition literature in several important ways. First, data collection begins in 1997 after numerous key pieces of legislation, including the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, the establishment and amendment to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1990 and 1997, and the establishment of the national framework of School-to-Work Opportunities systems as part of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act (STWOA) of 1994. Second, NLSY97 follows an age cohort of youth starting from their high school years through the critical transition time when all have aged out of secondary schools and have had the opportunity to enroll in post-secondary education. Third, NLSY97 is collected on an annual basis, allowing for the examination of time-varying dependent measures over the span of several years and time-varying covariates which can account for other transition events. Fourth, NLSY97 includes detailed information on the type of school-to-work programs in which youth participate during high school – distinguishing between overall participation in school-based or work-based learning to consider the specific effects of seven distinct programs: job shadowing, mentoring, cooperative education, school-sponsored enterprise, technical preparation, internships or apprenticeships, and enrollment in a career major. Finally, NLSY97 contains a rich array of information on employment histories, including job-specific characteristics. These data allow us to consider other aspects of work – aside from employment status and financial compensation – which may facilitate independent living. In addition to employment status, full-time work status, annual income, and hourly compensation, this paper also examines the association between school-to-work program participation and the receipt of employer-provided insurance benefits and paid sick days.


We begin by discussing the importance of the transition from education to work for youth with disabilities in light of recent research on other post-high school outcomes. Next, we discuss the mechanisms through which school-to-work programs may operate on later employment and review the literature on the efficacy of these initiatives. Finally, we consider the implications of our results for educators, rehabilitation specialists, and social scientists interested in the early adult life course and suggest how school-to-work programs may be most effective in helping youth with disabilities as they make their way to adulthood.

2. The school to work transition for youth with disabilities The transition from school to work is a critical juncture in the adolescent life course [19,32]. For many young adults, the end of formal education is associated with the movement away from dependence on the family and a step toward the independence facilitated by paid

J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10.

Shandra and Hogan

Page 3


employment [35]. For adolescents in the United States – relative to those in other industrialized countries – the transition from student to worker is highly unstandardized. A high school diploma has little occupational relevance and the lack of a nationally recognized vocational certification system distances educators from employers [24]. As a result, the work-related skill set of most students entering the labor force is usually limited to the general credentials that are obtained while enrolled in school.


However, the transition from school to work is particularly critical for young persons with disabilities, a disproportionate percentage of whom leave high school and neither work nor continue their education [46,48] despite the majority having transition goals to the contrary [10]. Substantially fewer youth with disabilities work for pay after leaving high school than youth in the general population – and while a lesser number are earning below minimum wage than in the past, only about one-third receive any type of employment benefits [9]. Furthermore, aside from their disabilities, these adolescents often face additional obstacles to post-high school success. Young persons with disabilities are more often members of racial, ethnic, and disadvantaged economic groups that encounter barriers to social achievement over the life course. They often have less advantageous family resources and are more likely to grow up in one-parent families, have parents with no more than a high school education, and live in poverty [20,21]. Finally, specially designed school curricula may also give youth with disabilities less access to the transition resources of their peers without disabilities – and fewer of the opportunities needed to practice the academic and social skills that are vital for postsecondary employment success [14]. Recent evidence from the second wave of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS2) suggests several reasons why post-high school employment is important for this population. First, out-of-school youth are increasingly likely to establish residential and financial independence which necessitates a source of stable income. Levine and Wagner [25] report that the number of youth with disabilities who are living apart from their parents two years after high school is similar to the number of youth without disabilities. Among those who are living with a partner or roommate outside of the parental home, two-thirds report annual incomes of $5,000 or less. Another two-thirds of youth with a disability hold a credit or charge card.


Furthermore, post-school employment can provide other important social resources for people with disabilities. Nonmonetary benefits such as paid sick days, insurance, and retirement benefits may further enable security and self-sufficiency among members of this population; especially for those who do not qualify for – or are underserved by – federal assistance. Working at a paid job may also facilitate emotional ties with other employees which can increase overall well-being, as Allen et al. [1] suggest that the size of a person with a disability's social network – and their confidence in the reliability of helping networks – is negatively related to depression. The social connections made at work may be especially important for those who leave high school without a degree or do not pursue post-secondary education, as Wagner et al. [46, ES-2] suggest that employment “is the sole mode of engagement in the community for about half of out-of-school youth with disabilities”.


Shandra and Hogan

Page 4


Several factors have been associated with the overall likelihood of employment – and the type of work – among people with disabilities. First, patterns of employment vary significantly by gender. Recent research suggests that post-high school women are just as likely to be engaged (enrolled in postsecondary education, working, or training for work) as their male counterparts [15]. However, women are more likely to hold personal care or service jobs while men work in maintenance and trade positions [30]. Occupational sex segregation is a significant contributor to the wage gap (e.g. [36,43]), which may help explain why women with disabilities continue to earn less per hour than their male counterparts [9]. Race and class also affect the post-high school employment of youth with disabilities. Multivariate analyses of the NLTS indicate that Black youth are significantly less likely to work for pay, even after controlling for type of disability, educational attainment, and prior work experience. Along with Hispanic youth, Black youth also earn a reduced hourly wage and are less likely to be working full-time than white youth. Similar patterns emerge by income. Lower-income youth with disabilities make less of an hourly wage and are significantly less likely to be engaged in either school, work, or training after high school than higher-income youth [9].


While these and other factors clearly affect which students are employed after high school, numerous programs have attempted to facilitate successful school-to-work transitions for individuals with disabilities. For example, the Perkins Vocational Education Act provides underserved populations and those with greater educational needs with technical and vocational support. Similarly, many Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) programs also offer counseling, training, and placement assistance to secure stable post-school jobs for students with disabilities. Finally, state school-to-work programs – many of which were established under the STWOA – are also designed to prepare students for employment via school-based and work-based learning opportunities. Funding is no longer provider specifically through the STWOA; however, this legislation did create a framework for many high school-based vocational and technical programs that continue today. Overall, the combined efforts of these different initiatives were vital in signaling what Wittenburg and Maag [50, p. 267] claim is “the establishment of a more formal service delivery system to assist youth as they transition from school”.


The school-based and work-based transition programs established by these initiatives differ widely in their focus and level of credentialing. However, they share the intention to prepare students for the challenges of the workplace through several possible mechanisms. First, participation in school-to-work initiatives can provide actual or simulated job experience that can be useful for building a youth's resume and demonstrating their future employability. Next, these types of programs can enable active communication with potential employers who can provide information about possible job opportunities. Finally, school-based and work-based transition programs can also provide formal or informal skill certification not traditionally provided in standard academic curricula [22,23]. In looking specifically at the benefits of school-to-work programs for students with disabilities, Burgstahler [8] found an increase in individuals' motivation to study and work toward a career, a greater understanding of the skills needed to succeed in job tasks (including those


Shandra and Hogan

Page 5


necessary to work effectively with other co-workers and supervisors) and better knowledge of specific career interests. Perhaps most importantly for this population, she also found that students reported gains in their understanding of disability-related work accommodations and a greater knowledge of their legal employment rights. Many of the objectives set forth by school-based and work-based initiatives may be useful in overcoming what Betz and Redclay [6] have identified as specific obstacles to employment for adolescents with special health care needs. In their assessment of the challenges of providing transition services, the authors cite a youth's lack of a career goal, the lack of referral to proper employment agencies, the lack of self advocacy, the lack of a mentor, and the lack of follow-through as work-related barriers. School-to-work programs that provide familiarity with employing institutions, the development of social networks, and the learning of appropriate worker roles may help young adults with disabilities overcome these obstacles.


At the national level, a paucity of data on the school to work transition of youth with disabilities has limited the scholarship on post-high school economic success [50]. However, assessments of the efficacy of school-to-work initiatives for this population [16,17, 31,38] suggest that program participation is positively associated with post-high school employment (but see [18,42]). Using data from the first wave of NLTS, Wagner and Blackorby [45] find that school-based vocational education contributes to greater employment rates and higher incomes but work experience programs are not associated with either outcome. Additionally, Benz et al.'s [5] examination of students in Oregon and Nevada suggests that school-based career counseling increases the likelihood that students with disabilities will be productively engaged (working, going to school, or participating in the military) and that participation in work-based programs increases the likelihood of competitive employment. Furthermore, analyses of the Marriott Foundation's Bridges From School to Work Program in Chicago, Atlanta, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. suggests that a significantly different number of urban youth with disabilities who previously participated in a vocational experience were later placed in jobs [13].


The first goal of this study is to extend these analyses by examining how participation in school to work programs affects the employment of young adults with disabilities over time. To do this, we utilize longitudinal multivariate regression techniques to analyze eight waves of the NLSY97. Next, given that young adults with disabilities are disproportionately holding jobs without benefits, we also wish to understand how school to work program participation might affect the receipt of fringe benefits. Therefore, in addition to examining overall work status and financial compensation, we also consider which factors are associated with an increase in the receipt of paid sick days and employer-offered health insurance. Finally, due to variation in the type of school to work programs currently being implemented, we also wish to understand which specific components are most beneficial for the post-high school work success of this population. Therefore, after considering how overall participation in school-based or work-based initiatives may affect the above outcomes, we present a second set of analyses which examine participation in cooperative


Shandra and Hogan

Page 6

education, school-sponsored enterprise, technical preparation, career major, mentoring, job shadowing, and internships.


3. Data and measures The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) is a nationally representative household-based sample of the non-institutional population of young persons in the United States [7]. NLSY97 was designed by the United States Department of Labor to document the transition from school to work among an age cohort of 8,984 children who were 12 to 16 years old as of December 31, 1996. Over 75,000 households were screened from 147 primary sampling units in order to draw a nationally representative sample and a supplemental Black and Hispanic oversample. These data are particularly useful for these analyses because of their focus on employment, schooling, vocational training and income and their inclusion of extensive information on educational attainment, enrollment status, and job histories. NLSY97 was also identified by Wittenburg and Stapleton [51] as a promising data source for information on school-to-work outcomes of youth with disabilities.

NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript

These analyses utilize information from the first eightwaves of data, which span the years between 1997 and 2004. Because we wish to focus specifically on the post-high school success of youth with disabilities, we limit our sample to only those children (N = 2254) who are reported to have a disability in the initial survey wave. Our conceptual model of disability is drawn from the World Health Organization's [52] International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) model which describe a child's health and wellbeing in terms of four components: (1) body structures, (2) body functions, (3) activities, and (4) participation. Body structures are anatomical parts of the body, such as organs and limbs, as well as structures of the nervous, sensory, and musculoskeletal systems. Body functions are the physiological functions of body systems, including motor and sensory abilities and psychological functions, such as attending, remembering, and thinking. Activities are tasks, including learning, communicating, walking, carrying, feeding, dressing, toileting, bathing, reading, preparing meals, shopping, washing clothes. Participation means involvement in family and community life, such as relationships, education, work, and recreational, religious, civic, and social activities. The ICF model also accounts for contextual factors in a child's life, including environmental and personal factors. The child disability measure used in these analyses is constructed from four domains for which parents reported youth activity limitations in 1997 – learning or emotional disabilities, sensory limitations, physical disabilities, or chronic illness. The small number of children with limitations precludes analyses for each aspect of disability, however, it is possible to abstract across disability type to determine if a child has one or more serious functional limitations (“currently limited a lot”), or no serious limitation but one or more moderate limitations (“currently limited a little”). Remaining children are classified as having one or more past limitations (“not currently limited” but have previously experienced a limitation). The validity of the disability measure was examined against other indicators associated with special health care needs, including overall health reports, school attendance records, and


Shandra and Hogan

Page 7


histories of remedial learning. The constructed measure of youth disability was strongly linked to these related variables. While the functional limitation of disability used here is not directly analogous to the IDEA definition, it does acknowledge that disability is constructed in the context of an individual's interaction with their environment [49]. The final base sample of children with disabilities who have data on all time-invariant measures includes 2254 respondents (see Table 1 for descriptive statistics). Of these, 32.5% have a moderate disability and 9.3% have a serious disability.


Data on participation in school-to-work programs is collected in each survey wave from all youth who are enrolled in any type of school (with the exception of the first round, which only asks youth in grades 9 through 12). Information is collected on seven types of schoolto-work programs, which can then be classified as either school-based or work-based initiatives (see Appendix Table 1 for more information). School-based programs include career major (“sequence of courses based on an occupational goal”), cooperative education (“combines academic and vocational studies with a job in a related field”), school-sponsored enterprise (“involves the production of goods or services by students for sale to or use by others”) and technical preparation (“a planned program of study with a defined career focus that links secondary and post-secondary education”). Work-based programs include job shadowing (“spending time following workers at a work site”), mentoring (“being matched with an individual in an occupation”), or internship or apprenticeship (“working for an employer to learn about a particular occupation or industry”). Participation in school-towork programs in high school is differentiated from post-high school participation based on the youth's last year of high school enrollment. In every survey wave, information on school-to-work programs is collected directly from the youth respondent.


All seven school-to-work measures are coded as time-invariant dichotomous measures; youth who have participated in these programs at any time during high school are compared to youth who have not participated in these programs during high school. Fifty-two percent of youth with disabilities report that they have participated in a school-based school-to-work program of any kind. Almost 17% have participated in a cooperative education program, 13.1% have participated in school-sponsored enterprise, and 15.5% have participated in technical preparation. Thirty-five percent of youth with disabilities report that they have participated in a work-based school-to-work program of any kind. More specifically, 10.5% have participated in a mentoring program, 24% have participated in job shadowing, and almost 12% have held an internship or apprenticeship. Other time-invariant demographic characteristics include 1997 reports of a respondent's gender (as reported by a parent and confirmed by youth) and race/ethnicity (as reported by the household informant in the original screening interview) as Black or Hispanic. To control for socioeconomic status, we also include two dichotomous measures which differentiate between youth who live in a household with an income to poverty ratio of 0– 100 or 101–200 versus youth from higher income households1. The poverty measure is constructed by NLSY97, with income information reported by parents. Next, we also consider whether or not the youth received a high school degree as of their last year of high 1Missing data on household income-to-poverty level in 1997 is imputed from subsequent survey years for 12.4% of cases. J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10.

Shandra and Hogan

Page 8


school enrollment. This information is collected from the youth respondent in all survey waves. In this sample of youth with disabilities, 55.3% are male, 23.6% are Black, 15.9% are Hispanic, and 76.8% have a high school degree. The longitudinal design of the NLSY97 is particularly advantageous for using repeat measures to examine employment outcomes over time. To consider if participation in school-to-work programs during high school is associated with more positive employment outcomes after high school, we construct person-years for each respondent beginning the calendar year after the year of last high school enrollment. This coding scheme was chosen to allow for the use of the annually constructed NLSY97 “best measures” for all financial compensation and work status variables; these “best measures” follow the calendar year and not the academic year. To adjust for students who do not finish high school at the completion of the traditional academic year, we also control for month and year of last high school enrollment2. Year of last high school enrollment thus determines how many years a respondent can be “followed” after high school; for example, respondents with complete data for all survey waves who finish (drop out or graduate) high school in 1997 can contribute seven years of observations (1998–2004) while those who finish high school in 2002 can only contribute two years of observations (2003–2004).


All respondents in the sample are old enough to age out of high school as of the last survey wave (20–24 in 2004). However, to account for the possibility that some respondents have not yet reached the age where they have finished college, yearly time-varying measures of post-high school educational enrollment and the receipt of a college degree are also included in all analyses. Forty-three percent of the respondents report being enrolled in some type of education in any year after high school and 5.9% have received a college degree by the last year of observation.


All dependent measures also vary by year and include measures of financial compensation, employment status, and health-related fringe benefits. All dependent measures are constructed from youth reports. First, the annual income measure is a created measure constructed by NLSY97 for each year to include the total wages, salary, commissions, and tips from all jobs before taxes and deductions. The sample for this measure includes all respondents who report any annual pay. The annual income measure is logged to correct for skewness in the final analyses. Next, NLSY97 also creates a measure which asks each respondent to report their hourly compensation – including all wages, overtime, tips, and bonuses – for each employee-type (i.e. not freelance) job. When respondents report more than one job, the hourly compensation measure used here is coded to reflect the job with the highest compensation. The sample for this measure includes all respondents who report any hourly pay. The hourly compensation measure is also logged to correct for skewness in the final analyses. Finally, NLSY97 creates a measure which asks respondents to report the total number of hours worked at employee-type jobs during each survey year. We use this measure to calculate average weekly hours and then construct the part- or full-time work 2Because data are available in a continuous month scheme for all “benefits” measures, an alternate coding scheme was considered whereby years were measured in 12-month intervals as of the month of last high school enrollment. Results were highly comparable. Therefore, calendar years are used in order to preserve a consistent time frame between the fringe benefits equations and those which model the NLSY97-created annual best measures of financial compensation and work status. J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10.

Shandra and Hogan

Page 9


status variable to differentiate between respondent who work an average of 35 hours each week from respondents who work less than an average of 35 hours each week. The sample for this measure includes all respondents who report any hours of paid employment in that year. It is important to note that the above are considered “best measures” by NLSY97 and were created to include the financial compensation and the number of hours worked among respondents in all jobs, regardless of how temporary or intermittent.


Conversely, job-specific fringe benefit data in the NLSY97 is collected on a more limited basis. Questions about benefits are only asked of respondents who hold employee-type jobs for at least 13 weeks. Therefore, the measures of health-related benefits and the corresponding employment status measure include information only on more “stable” jobs. In these analyses, the dichotomous indicator of stable employment is the only measure which includes all respondents and is operationalized to differentiate between respondents who hold the same job for at least 13 weeks in any year and respondents who do not hold the same job for this period. We use this coding scheme in order to preserve comparability with the scheme used by NLSY97. Because jobs that are held for at least 13 weeks are the only jobs for which we have fringe benefit information, the 13 week guideline is maintained for consistency. Among those who are “stably employed” in a year, dichotomous measures are constructed to indicate if a respondent holds any job which offers insurance benefits or paid sick days. Taken together, these dependent measures tap into several distinct aspects of employment. Not only do they allow us to determine which factors are associated with overall employment, we can also ascertain which factors increase the receipt of benefits (and presumably, the attainment of “good” jobs) after young adults do become stably employed. As of their final year of observation, respondents who report an annual income make an average of just over $13,000, the average hourly compensation of those reporting compensation is around $13.50, and 31% of those reporting any work hours are employed fulltime. Additionally, 75% of respondents are stably employed, 46% of respondents are offered an insurance plan through their employer and almost 32% received paid sick days.

4. Methodology


NLSY97 is especially advantageous for examining the school to work transition because its longitudinal design allows for the consideration of repeated employment outcomes over time. However, the measurement of the same individuals at different time points often results in positive correlation within subjects. This is of notable concern when modeling employment outcomes, as a youth's future employment is highly dependent upon their previous employment [10]. Because traditional regression techniques assume that all outcomes are independent, their application to longitudinal data generally underestimate the variance of group effects (increasing the likelihood of Type I error) and overestimate the variance of time effects (increasing the likelihood of Type II error) [12,53]. As a result, ignoring the correlation between repeated observations can lead to biased and invalid inferences about regression coefficients [41]. Therefore, we utilize Generalized Estimating Equations (GEEs) to analyze employment outcomes over time. GEEs are a type of marginal (or population-averaged) model developed


Shandra and Hogan

Page 10


by Liang and Zeger [26] as an extension of the generalized linear model which accounts for within-person correlation by adjusting the covariance matrix of the estimated parameters [54]. The coefficients produced by linear GEEs represent how much the average dependent outcome would change for every one-unit increase in a covariate across the entire population [4,33,34]. These models are especially advantageous for the examination of longitudinal data, as they allow for efficient coefficient estimates and robust standard errors despite nonindependence between repeated observations ([11]; see [3] for further elaboration). The models presented here utilize a lagged autoregressive structure to characterize the correlation matrix; however, test statistics and standard errors are based on empirical estimates, which are robust to misspecifications of the assumed correlation structure [2]. GEEs are used to estimate both the linear outcomes of annual income and hourly compensation as well as the binary outcomes of stable employment, full-time employment, and receipt of employer-provided insurance and paid sick days.

5. Results


These analyses have two primary objectives. First, the relationship between school-to-work program participation and the post-high school work outcomes of employment status (working stably or not, working-part time or full-time), financial compensation (hourly and annually), and availability of job benefits (insurance and paid sick days) is explored using the overall school-based and work-based school-to-work measures as they have been considered in the previous literature. Second, all employment outcomes are examined with detailed school-to-work program measures in order to ascertain what types of school-based or work-based program are most effective. Multivariate results from Table 2 are largely consistent with previous studies of overall school-to-work program participation and financial compensation and work status. First, participation in school-based programs is positively associated with annual income, stable employment, and full-time work. Even after considering gender, race/ethnicity, severity of disability, household poverty, school enrollment status and educational attainment, the odds of being stably employed and working full-time for an average young adult with a disability who has participated in a school-based program are over 1.2 times higher than they are for those who have not participated in a school-based program.


These results also suggest that school-to-work program participation is positively and significantly related to employer-offered fringe benefits. Stably employed youth with disabilities who have participated in school-based programs are more likely to hold a job where they are offered insurance from their employers. Furthermore, those who have participated in work-based programs are more likely to be offered insurance and paid sick days from their employers than those who have not participated in these programs. Table 3 extends these analyses to examine the possibility that some types of school-to-work programs are more strongly associated with employment outcomes than other types of school-to-work programs. Among all seven types of school- and work-based initiatives, participation in a cooperative education program is most consistently related to employment. Results indicate that participation in cooperative education is positively and significantly


Shandra and Hogan

Page 11

associated with annual income, full-time work, holding a job with employer-offered health insurance, and the receipt of paid sick days.


Several other school-based programs are also related to post-high school employment; however, participation in these types of initiatives is solely related to work status outcomes. The average student with a disability who has participated in school-sponsored enterprise or a career major is more likely to be stably employed than those who have not experienced these programs. Likewise, participation in technical preparation is positively associated with the likelihood of full-time employment. Finally, internship or mentoring experiences are the only work-based initiatives to have an association with the post-high school work outcomes examined here. The average student who participates in a mentoring program is more likely to receive employer-offered paid sick days. Those who have internship experience also receive increased hourly compensation. Interestingly, the magnitude of the coefficient for participating in an internship (0.101) is almost as large as the magnitude of the coefficient for being male (0.107).


The severity of a youth's disability is also important to consider when examining the posthigh school employment situation of young adults with limiting conditions. The results presented here indicate that severity is important for most post-high school work outcomes – especially those outcomes which aren't limited to the sample of youth who are stably employed. The odds of the average youth with a moderately or seriously limiting condition being stably employed after high school are 14% and 36% (respectively) lower than for the average youth who is not limited in 1997 but has been limited in the past. Having a seriously limiting condition also has implications for financial compensation, with young adults with this type of disability receiving lower annual income and lower hourly compensation. However, these models also indicate that youth with moderate and serious conditions who are stably employed are no less likely than youth without moderate or seriously limiting conditions to be offered health-related benefits from their employers.


Other demographic characteristics are also important to take into account when modeling work outcomes. Being a male with disability – versus a female – is positively and significantly associated with annual income, hourly compensation, full-time employment, and employer-offered insurance. Race and ethnicity are also important. Being a Black youth with a disability – versus a non-Hispanic white youth – is negatively and significantly associated with annual income, hourly compensation, stable employment, and full-time employment. However, being either Black or Hispanic is positively and significantly associated with the receipt of paid sick days. Having a lower income-to-poverty ratio is negatively and significantly associated with annual income, hourly compensation, and likelihood of stable employment. Finally, school status and attainment also matter. Having a high school degree is positively and significantly associated with all positive work outcomes. Post-high school enrollment is significantly associated with decreased annual income and hourly compensation as well as a lower likelihood of working full-time, being offered insurance, and receiving paid sick days.


Shandra and Hogan

Page 12


These results are to be expected, as students who pursue post-secondary education should have less time to devote to paid work – and therefore, will be less likely to receive fringe benefits – than students who are not enrolled. The returns to an advanced degree once youth are no longer enrolled, however, are substantial. Holding a college degree is positively and significantly related to annual income, hourly compensation, the likelihood of stable employment, and the likelihood of holding a job that offers fringe benefits.

6. Discussion and implications


These analyses suggest that both school-based and work-based transition initiatives can be advantageous for the post-high school employment of youth with disabilities. However, different aspects of these programs emerge as beneficial for different aspects of employment. Participation in a school-based program appears to be best for increasing the likelihood that students with disabilities will be stably employed and working full-time. Conversely, participation in a work-based program appears to be best for increasing the likelihood that students with disabilities will be employed in jobs that provide fringe benefits such as health insurance and paid sick days. In combination, these programs can help provide the support that young adults with disabilities need to integrate into the formal economy and more adult roles. These results also indicate that – once individuals with disabilities are stably employed – they can be employed in “good” jobs that provide employee benefits. The highly significant effect of severity of disability on financial compensation and work status disappears when considering the outcomes of employer-offered insurance and paid sick days among those who are consistently employed. While individuals with serious disabilities are less likely to be stably employed, they are just as likely to receive job benefits once in a stable job as individuals with less limiting conditions. School-based programs which increase the likelihood of stable employment, therefore, may be doubly beneficial.


Furthermore, specific types of school-based and work-based programs also appear to have different effects on post-high school employment. For example, participation in cooperative education programs increases financial compensation, the likelihood of fulltime work, and the receipt of fringe benefits. Given these programs' emphasis on combining academic and vocational studies, transition initiatives which integrate both school and work proficiency may be most effective for improving the employment outcomes of young adults with disabilities. Participation in the other school-based programs of school-sponsored enterprise, technical preparation and career major also increases students' likelihood of full-time, stable employment, suggesting that programs which expose students to basic management skills and occupational instruction may be most effective for general employability. A less consistent pattern emerges when examining the relationship between participation in specific types of work-based programs and the employment outcomes examined here. Regardless, any program which facilitates the development of network ties between students and employers may be advantageous for identifying job opportunities – especially because individuals with disabilities more often rely on friends or family members to gain employment [17,39,40,47].


Shandra and Hogan

Page 13


NLSLY97 allows us to explore many important facets of the transition to adulthood. In light of its longitudinal design and detailed work histories, however, NLSY97 does not allow us to distinguish between students who receive an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and those who do not. While the functional limitation of disability used here is not directly analogous to the IDEA definition, these analyses do suggest that both school-based and work-based initiatives can effectively facilitate early work success for young adults with limiting conditions. Consequently, both students who receive an IEP and those who do not can benefit from formal transition experiences. These results may help educators and specialists who are responsible for developing learning objectives when considering how to bridge education and employment. However, other longitudinal datasets (when they become available) that can explore additional conceptualizations of disability would provide a useful addition to the results presented here.


Finally, this study could be well supplemented in future survey or case study research which can account for variation in program-specific implementation. Phelps and Hanley-Maxwell's [37] comprehensive review of program components suggests that adequate administration, appropriate curriculum and instruction, comprehensive support services, formalized communication, and follow-up are necessary to provide effective outcomes for students with special needs. Furthermore, Burgstahler [8] suggests that teamwork between stakeholders – including students, educators, parents, mentors, employees, and community-based organizations – is especially important for school-to-work programs to effectively include young adults with disabilities. Additional research on the efficacy of program participation for this population would benefit by considering how post-high school employment varies not only by program type but also by level of administrative support and individual (student, teacher, and employer) satisfaction. Ultimately, a greater understanding of which forms of school-to-work programs are most effective for achieving which types of employment outcomes is an important step in helping students with disabilities to achieve their transition goals.

Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge the William T. Grant Foundation for its support of this research.


Appendix Table 1: Definition of School-to-Work Program Types used in Analyses Program type

NLSY97 definition

Typical aims and characteristics

Career Major

Sequence of courses based on an occupational goal

Program of study designed to provide technical and academic proficiency; may be coupled with work-based learning lead by employers or partnerships with professional associations [29]

Cooperative Education

Combines academic and vocational studies with a job in a related field

Coordinated program of school-based and career-related experiences; may also include evaluation plans and provide course credit [44]

School-Based


Shandra and Hogan

Page 14


Program type

NLSY97 definition

Typical aims and characteristics

School-Sponsored Enterprise

Involves the production of goods or services by students for sale to or use by others

Typically provides work-based school coupled with experiences such as building houses, managing retail stores, servicing automobiles, and running childcare centers [44]

Technical Preparation

Planned program of study with defined career focus that links secondary and post-secondary education

Typically provides several years of sequential coursework and culminate in an associate's degree or certificate [44]

Job Shadowing

Time following workers at a work site

Typically provides career exploration activities by pairing students with employees at the workplace. May target younger students and include activities to assess job-related goals [28]

Mentoring

Being matched with an individual in an occupation

Formal or information relationships with an adult in the workplace; may also require the youth to work for a minimum number of hours [27]

Internship or Apprenticeship

Working for an employer to learn about a particular occupation or industry

Typically provides the opportunity for progressively higher levels of work experience; may also include an industry-recognized skill credential and extend through postsecondary education [44]

Work-Based


References


1. Allen SM, Ciambrone D, Welch LC. Stage of life course and social support as a mediator of mood state among persons with disability. Journal of Aging and Health. 2000; 12:318–341. [PubMed: 11067700] 2. Allison, PD. Logistic Regression Using the SAS System: Theory and Application. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1999. 3. Allison, PD. Fixed Effects Regression Methods for Longitudinal Data Using SAS. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 2005. 4. Ballinger GA. Using generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data analysis. Organizational Research Methods. 2004; 7:127–150. 5. Benz MR, Yovanoff P, Doren B. School-to-work components that predict postschool success for students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children. 1997; 63:151–164. 6. Betz CL, Redcay G. Lessons learned from providing transition services to adolescents with special health care needs. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing. 2002; 25:129–149. [PubMed: 12060519] 7. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Produced by the National Opinion Research Center and the University of Chicago and distributed by the Center for Human Resource Research. The Ohio State University; 2006. Department of Labor, National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 cohort, 1997– 2004 (rounds 1–8) [computer file]. 8. Burgstahler S. A collaborative model to promote career success for students with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2001; 16:209–215. 9. Cameto, R. After High School: A First Look at the Postschool Experiences of Youth with Disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2005. Employment of youth with disabilities after high school. 10. Cameto, R.; Levine, P.; Wagner, M. Transition Planning for Students with Disabilities: A Special Topic Report of Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2004. 11. Diggle, PJ.; Liang, K.; Zeger, SL. The Analysis of Longitudinal Data. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1994.


Shandra and Hogan

Page 15

NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript

12. Dunlop DD. Regression for longitudinal data: A bridge from least squares regression. The American Statistician. 1994; 48:299–303. 13. Fabian ES. Urban youth with disabilities: Factors affecting transition employment. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin. 2007; 50:130–138. 14. Gajar, A. Postsecondary Education. In: Rusch, F.; Chadsey, J., editors. Beyond High School: Transition from School to work. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.; 1998. p. 383-401. 15. Garza, NM. After High School: A First Look at the Postschool Experiences of Youth with Disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2005. Engagement in postsecondary education, work, or preparation for work; p. 3(1–6) 16. Hasazi S, Gordon L, Roe C, Hull M, Fink R, Salembier G. A statewide follow-up on the post high school employment and residential status of students labeled “mentally retarded”. Education and Training of the Mentally Retard. 1985; 20:222–234. 17. Hasazi SB, Gordon LR, Roe CA. Factors associated with the employment status of handicapped youth exiting high school from 1979–1983. Exceptional Children. 1985; 51:455–469. [PubMed: 3987763] 18. Heal LW, Rusch FR. Predicting employment for students who leave special education high school programs. Exceptional Children. 1995; 61:472–487. 19. Hogan DP, Astone NM. The transition to adulthood. Annual Review of Sociology. 1986; 12:109– 130. 20. Hogan DP, Rogers ML, Msall ME. Children with disability: Functional limitations and key indicators of well-being. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 2000; 154:1042–1048. [PubMed: 11030857] 21. Hogan DP, Shandra CL, Msall ME. Family developmental risk factors among adolescents with disabilities and children of parents with disabilities. Journal of Adolescence. 2007; 30:1001–1019. [PubMed: 17445879] 22. Hollenbeck K. School-to-work programs to facilitate youth employment and learning. Employment Research. Spring;1996 23. Hollenbeck, K. Their Own Words: Student Perspectives on School-to-work Opportunities. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement; 1996. 24. Kerckhoff, AC. From student to worker. In: Mortimer, JT.; Shanahan, MJ., editors. Handbook of the Life Course. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 2004. p. 251-268. 25. Levine, P.; Wagner, M. After High School: A First Look at the Postschool Experiences of Youth with Disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2005. The household circumstances and emerging independence of out-of-school youth with disabilities; p. 6(1–20) 26. Liang K, Zeger SL. Regression analysis for correlated data. Annual Review of Public Health. 1993; 14:43–68. 27. Linnehan F. A longitudinal study of work-based, adult-youth mentoring. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2003; 63:40–54. 28. Lozada M. Job shadowing – Career exploration at work. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers. 2001; 76:30–33. 29. Lynch RL. High school career and technical education for the first decade of the 21st century. Journal of Vocational Education Research. 2000; 25:155–198. 30. Marder, C.; Cardoso, D.; Wagner, M. Employment among youth with disabilities. In: Wagner, M.; Cadwallader, TW.; Marder, C., editors. Life Outside the Classroom for Youth with Disabilities, A Report From the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2003. p. 5(1–10) 31. Mithaug DE, Horiuchi C, Fanning P. A report on the Colorado statewide follow-up survey of special education students. Exceptional Children. 1985; 51:397–404. [PubMed: 3156044] 32. Mortimer, JT.; Staff, J.; Oesterle, S. Adolescent work and the early socioeconomic career. In: Mortimer, JT.; Shanahan, MJ., editors. Handbook of the Life Course. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 2004. p. 437-463. 33. Neuhaus JM. Statistical methods for longitudinal and clustered designs with binary responses. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 1992; 1:249–273. [PubMed: 1341660]


Shandra and Hogan

Page 16

NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript

34. Neuhaus JM, Kalbfleisch JD, Hauck WW. A comparison of cluster-specific and populationaveraged approaches for analyzing correlated binary data. International Statistical Review. 1991; 59:25–35. 35. Pallas, AM. Educational transitions, trajectories, and pathways. In: Mortimer, JT.; Shanahan, MJ., editors. Handbook of the Life Course. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 2004. p. 165-184. 36. Petersen T, Morgan LA. Separate and unequal: Occupation-establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. American Journal of Sociology. 1995; 101:329–365. 37. Phelps LA, Hanley-Maxwell C. School-to-work transitions for youth with disabilities: A review of outcomes and practices. Review of Educational Research. 1997; 67:197–226. 38. Phelps, LA.; Wermuth, TR. Effective Vocational Education for Students with Special Needs: A Framework. Berkeley, CA: University of California, National Center for Research in Vocational Education; 1992. 39. Schalock RL, Lilley MA. Placement from community-based mental health programs: How well do clients do after 8 to 10 years? American Journal of Mental Deficiency. 1986; 90:669–676. [PubMed: 3717222] 40. Schalock RL, Woltze B, Ross I, Elliott B, Werbel G, Paterson K. Postsecondary community placement of handicapped students: A five year follow-up. Learning Disability Quarterly. 1986; 9:292–303. 41. Sheu C. Regression analysis of correlated binary outcomes. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 2000; 32:269–273. 42. Sitlington P, Frank A. Are adolescents with learning disabilities successfully crossing the bridge into adult life? Learning Disabilities Quarterly. 1990; 13:97–111. 43. Tomaskovic-Devey D, Skaggs S. Sex segregation, labor process organization, and gender earnings equality. American Journal of Sociology. 2002; 108:102–128. 44. Unger DD, Luecking R. Work in progress: Including students with disabilities in school-to-work initiatives. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities. 1998; 13:94–100. 45. Wagner M, Blackorby J. Transition from high school to work or college: How special education students fare. The Future of Children. 1996; 6:103–120. [PubMed: 8689255] 46. Wagner, M.; Newman, L.; Cameto, R.; Garza, N.; Levin, P. After High School: A Report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International; 2005. 47. Wehman P, Kregal J, Barcus JM. From school to work: A vocational transition model for handicapped students. Exceptional Children. 1985; 52:25–37. [PubMed: 4043184] 48. Wells T, Sandefur GD, Hogan DP. What happens after the high school years among young persons with disabilities? Social Forces. 2003; 82:803–832. 49. Wittenburg DC, Golden T, Fishman M. Transition options for youth with disabilities: An overview of the programs and policies that affect the transition from school. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2002; 17:195–206. 50. Wittenburg DC, Maag E. School to where? A literature review on economic outcomes of youth with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2002; 17:265–280. 51. Wittenburg, DC.; Stapleton, DC. Summary Review of Data Sources for School to work Transitions by Youth with Disabilities – Policy Brief. Cornell University: Rehabilitation Research and Training Center for Economic Research on Employment Policy for Persons with Disability; 2000. 52. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001. 53. Zeger SL, Liang K, Albert PS. Models for longitudinal data: A generalized estimating equation approach. Biometrics. 1988; 44:1049–1060. [PubMed: 3233245] 54. Zorn CJW. Generalized estimating equation models for correlated data: A review with applications. American Journal of Political Science. 2001; 45:470–490.


Shandra and Hogan

Page 17

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics


Mean or Proportion

Standard Deviation

Male

0.553

(0.497)

Black

0.236

(0.425)

Hispanic

0.159

(0.366)

0–100 Income to Poverty Ratio

0.229

(0.420)


0.223

(0.416)

Individual Characteristics

High School Degree

0.768

(0.422)

Post-High School Enrollment (time-varying; at any time during observation period)

0.431

(0.495)

College Degree (time-varying; as of last survey wave)

0.059

(0.237)

Moderate Disability

0.325

(0.469)

Serious Disability

0.093

(0.290)

0.518

(0.500)


0.166

(0.372)


0.131

(0.338)


0.155

(0.362)

Career Major

0.382

(0.486)

Any Work-Based

0.348

(0.477)

Mentoring

0.105

(0.306)

Job Shadowing

0.240

(0.427)

Internship

0.119

(0.324)

0.754

(0.431)

Severity of Disability

School-to-Work Programs


Any School-Based

Dependent Measures (as of year of last observation) Stable Employment Working Full-Time

0.311

(0.463)

13,189.13

(11,821.16)

Hourly Compensation

13.427

(14.710)

Employer-Offered Health Insurance

0.460

(0.498)

Employer-Offered Paid Sick Days

0.317

(0.465)

Annual Income


Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997; data presented are unweighted means Base N = 2254


NIH-PA Author Manuscript Table 2


J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10. 0.063** (0.027) −0.068*** (0.017) 0.122*** (0.040)

0.400*** (0.063) −0.479*** (0.037) 0.225* (0.101)

High School Degree

Post-High School Enrollment

6230

−5348.02

−6092.74

Number of Observations (person-years)

4377

−0.005 (0.045)

Work-Based

Log Likelihood

0.013 (0.020)

0.082* (0.043)

School-Based

0.011 (0.020)

−0.123*** (0.039)

−0.346*** (0.093)

Serious Disability

School-to- Work Programs

−0.012 (0.020)

−0.067 (0.046)

Moderate Disability


College Degree

0.780** (0.104)

−0.066** (0.025)

−0.062 (0.052)


7493

−3827.98

1.096 (0.061)

1.271** (0.086)

0.643*** (0.139)

0.860* (0.089)

1.856* (0.301)

0.891 (0.080)

2.052*** (0.107)

0.624*** (0.107)

−0.110*** (0.028)

−0.159** (0.064)

0.903 (0.082)

0.557*** (0.098)

1.077 (0.082)


−0.051* (0.026)

0.108*** (0.019)

Stable Employment

−0.031 (0.026)

− 0.301*** (0.058)

0.260*** (0.041)

Hourly Compensation

Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997 (Waves 1–8).

p < 0.001; one-tailed tests.

p < 0.05;

***

**

p < 0.01;

5534

−3053.25

1.080 (0.089)

1.238** (0.087)

0.818 (0.151)

1.017 (0.092)

0.670 (0.270)

0.343*** (0.092)

1.482*** (0.117)

1.021 (0.108)

0.851 (0.114)

1.037 (0.115)

0.557*** (0.111)

1.791*** (0.084)

Full-Time

Work Status (Odds Ratios)

0.012 (0.057)

Hispanic

Black

Male


Annual Income

Financial Conipensation (Coeff.)

Models also control for age, year of last high school enrollment, and month of last high school enrollment.

*

NIH-PA Author Manuscript 5712

5554

−3411.87

1.188* (0.090)

1.167* (0.084) −3699.83

1.050 (0.089)

0.778 (0.161)

1.039 (0.095)

2.391*** (0.207)

0.541*** (0.077)

1.704*** (0.125)

0.956 (0.112)

1.024 (0.120)

1.510*** (0.120)

1.291* (0.111)

0.980 (0.086)

Sick Days

1.204* (0.081)

0.917 (0.152)

1.053 (0.087)

2.331*** (0.228)

0.437*** (0.073)

1.548*** (0.114)

1.066 (0.100)

0.899 (0.112)

1.128 (0.109)

0.902 (0.103)

1.160** (0.079)

Insurance

Fringe Benefits (Odds Ratios)

Generalized Estimating Equations - Overall School-to-Work Program Participation and Employment Outcomes

Shandra and Hogan Page 18

NIH-PA Author Manuscript Table 3


NIH-PA Author Manuscript 0.058* (0.027) −0.068*** (0.017) 0.120** (0.040)

0.396*** (0.062) −0.478*** (0.037) 0.229* (0.101)

High School Degree

Post-High School Enrollment

J Vocat Rehabil. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 10. 0.051 (0.061) 0.032 (0.061) 0.067 (0.046)



Career Major

0.067 (0.067) −6082.21

Log Likelihood

6230

−5335.04

7493

−3816.23

0.996 (0.101) 1.088 (0.141)

0.101*** (0.029)

5534

−3045.23

1.114 (0.131)

1.022 (0.099)

1.085 (0.134)

1.128 (0.095)

1.253** (0.097)

0.989 (0.143)

1.021 (0.110)

1.214* (0.116) 1.184 (0.126)

5712

−3696.33

1.147 (0.120)

1.115 (0.095)

0.901 (0.132)

1.076 (0.088)

1.194 (0.119)

1.135 (0.124)

1.313* (0.139)

−0.020 (0.023)

−0.011 (0.031)

0.009 (0.022)

0.016 (0.026)

0.033 (0.032)

1.261* (0.106)

0.918 (0.153)

1.046 (0.087)

2.348*** (0.228)

0.439*** (0.073)

1.570*** (0.114)

1.067 (0.101)

0.909 (0.113)

1.134 (0.109)

0.899 (0.104)

1.164* (0.079)

Insurance

1.206* (0.106)

0.824 (0.153)

1.020 (0.093)

0.676 (0.272)

0.344*** (0.092)

1.463*** (0.118)

1.029 (0.108)

0.861 (0.114)

1.037 (0.115)

0.545*** (0.112)

1.787*** (0.084)

Full-Time

5554

−3400.05

1.005 (0.127)

1.074 (0.102)

1.283* (0.136)

0.995 (0.096)

1.033 (0.119)

0.959 (0.127)

1.261* (0.116)

0.788 (0.161)

1.040 (0.095)

2.399*** (0.209)

0.540*** (0.077)

1.705*** (0.125)

0.958 (0.112)

1.033 (0.120)

1.506*** (0.119)

1.275* (0.112)

0.984 (0.087)

Sick Days

Fringe Benefits (Odds Ratios)

1.142 (0.116)

0.639*** (0.140)

0.859* (0.089)

1.871* (0.300)

0.891 (0.080)

Models also control for age, year of last high school enrollment, and month of last high school enrollment.

4377

−0.073 (0.049)

Job Shadowing

Internship

Number of Observations (person-years)

0.026 (0.069)

Mentoring

Work-Based School to Work Programs

0.119** (0.051)


0.012 (0.027)

−0.120*** (0.039)

−0.338*** (0.093)

Serious Disability

School-Based School-to- Work Programs

−0.012 (0.020)

−0.063 (0.046)

Moderate Disability


College Degree

0.789* (0.104)

−0.068** (0.025)

−0.060 (0.052)

101–200 Income to Poverty Ratio 2.020*** (0.107)

0.630*** (0.107)

−0.108*** (0.028)

−0.154** (0.064)

0.901 (0.119)

0.544*** (0.098)

1.077 (0.082)


−0.056* (0.026)

0.107*** (0.019)

Stable Employment

−0.033 (0.026)

−0.316*** (0.058)

0.261*** (0.041)

Hourly Compensation

Work Status (Odds Ratios)

0.009 (0.057)

Hispanic

Black

Male


Annual Income

Financial Compensation (Coeff.)

Generalized Estimating Equations - Overall School-to-Work Program Participation and Employment Outcomes


Source: National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997 (Waves 1–8).

p < 0.001; one-tailed tests.

***

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01;

NIH-PA Author Manuscript *





Conceptualizing the construct of participation in adults with disabilities.

Transition outcomes for young adults with disabilities.

Asthma and employment in young adults.

The Vocational Training FacilityAn Interactive Learning Program to Return Persons With Physical Disabilities to Employment.

Victimization and restricted participation among young people with disabilities in the US child welfare system.

National health surveillance of adults with disabilities, adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and adults with no disabilities.

Activity and participation characteristics of adults with learning disabilities--a systematic review.

Attitudes toward people with disabilities and judgments of employment potential.

Identifying alterable patterns in employment success for highly successful adults with learning disabilities.

A systematic review of mentorship programs to facilitate transition to post-secondary education and employment for youth and young adults with disabilities.

Employment, epilepsy, and the school-leaver.

Self-management program participation by older adults with diabetes: Chronic Disease Self-Management Program and Diabetes Self-Management Program.

Effectiveness of school-initiated physical activity program on secondary school students' physical activity participation.

School adjustment of children with observable disabilities.

Education and employment experiences in young adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Evaluation of competencies in the field of vocational rehabilitation and the employment of persons with disabilities.

Metabolomic (anthropometric and biochemical) indexes and metabolic syndrome in adolescents and young adults with intellectual disabilities.

[Results of rehabilitation in a residential unit for young adults with epilepsy and mild intellectual disabilities].

A one year follow-up of urban young adults with mental retardation in supported employment.

Expectations from different perspectives on future work outcome of young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Influence of the environment on participation in social roles for young adults with down syndrome.

Sports participation and quality of life in adolescents and young adults with congenital heart disease.

Psychiatric disorders in adolescents and young adults with Down syndrome and other intellectual disabilities.

The impact of arthritis on the early employment experiences of young adults: A literature review.