Commonwealth Disability Services Census: 1998

[Excerpt] The Commonwealth Minister for Family and Community Services, through the Department of Family and Community Services, funds disability services in each State and Territory. This funding provides access for people with a disability to vocational programs and employment opportunities, promotes economic and social participation and choice in work and community life. Information is collected each year from services in receipt of funding. This report, the fourth in the series, contains the findings from the 1998 Commonwealth Disability Services Census and covers all Commonwealth funded employment, print disability, advocacy, and information services. The collection provides information to assist in the planning, development and management of Commonwealth disability programs and enables the Commonwealth to fulfil its reporting obligations under the Commonwealth/State Disability Agreement.

Achieving Quality: Consumer Involvement in Quality Evaluation of Services

[Excerpt] The aim of this paper is to raise awareness of the fact that changes in the approach towards the “clients” or “consumers” of services for people with intellectual disability do have an important impact on the way the quality evaluation systems of these services should be designed and organised.

The Eligibility Definition Used in the Social Security Administration’s Disability Programs Needs to be Changed

In its October 2003 report on the definition of disability used by the Social Security Administration’s (SSA’s) disability programs [i.e., Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for people with disabilities], the Social Security Advisory Board raises the issue of whether this definition is at odds with the concept of disability embodied in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and, more importantly, with the aspirations of people with disabilities to be full participants in mainstream social activities and lead fulfilling, productive lives. The Board declares that “the Nation must face up to the contradictions created by the existing definition of disability.” I wholeheartedly agree. Further, I have concluded that we have to make fundamental, conceptual changes to both how we define eligibility for economic security benefits, and how we provide those benefits, if we are ever to fulfill the promise of the ADA. To convince you of that proposition, I will begin by relating a number of facts that paint a very bleak picture – a picture of deterioration in the economic security of the population that the disability programs are intended to serve; a picture of programs that purport to provide economic security, but are themselves financially insecure and subject to cycles of expansion and cuts that undermine their purpose; a picture of programs that are facing their biggest expenditure crisis ever; and a picture of an eligibility determination process that is inefficient and inequitable -- one that rations benefits by imposing high application costs on applicants in an arbitrary fashion. I will then argue that the fundamental reason for this bleak picture is the conceptual definition of eligibility that these programs use – one rooted in a disability paradigm that social scientists, people with disabilities, and, to a substantial extent, the public have rejected as being flawed, most emphatically through the passage of the ADA. Current law requires eligibility rules to be based on the premise that disability is medically determinable. That’s wrong because, as the ADA recognizes, a person’s environment matters. I will further argue that programs relying on this eligibility definition must inevitably: reward people if they do not try to help themselves, but not if they do; push the people they serve out of society’s mainstream, fostering a culture of isolation and dependency; relegate many to a lifetime of poverty; and undermine their promise of economic security because of the periodic “reforms” that are necessary to maintain taxpayer support. I conclude by pointing out that to change the conceptual definition for program eligibility, we also must change our whole approach to providing for the economic security of people with disabilities. We need to replace our current “caretaker” approach with one that emphasizes helping people with disabilities help themselves. I will briefly describe features that such a program might require, and point out the most significant challenges we would face in making the transition.

State Estimates of Employment Rates for Persons with Disabilities: Report Summary

Statistics on the states’ employment rates for persons with disabilities relative to their non-disabled peers may be of assistance to providers of employment services for persons with disabilities. Such information can help service providers, policy makers, and disability advocacy leaders to assess whether the employment rate of people with disabilities is improving over time, given policy, regulatory, and service intervention strategies. A recent report from the Cornell University Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) for Economic Research on Employment Policy for Persons with Disabilities uses data from the March Current Population Survey to estimate employment rates for persons with and without a disability in the non-institutionalized working-age (aged 25 through 61) civilian population in the United States, and for each state and the District of Columbia for the years 1980 through 1998. The employment rate of persons with a disability relative to that of persons without disabilities are found to vary greatly across states. Over the last 20 years the relative employment rate of those with a disability dramatically declined overall and in most states.

A Comparison of the Implementation of the Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) in the United States and the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 in the United Kingdom

This summarizes the results of recently conducted surveys in the United States and Britain to assess employer response in each of these countries to their respective employment disability nondiscrimination legislation.

The Benefits Planner: Improved Work Incentives in Social Security Disability Insurance Program - Changes Will Make Work More Attractive to SSDI Recipients

This newsletter will provide valuable information on how work for persons with disabilities effects government benefits, with an emphasis on the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) work incentives. Each newsletter will contribute to an ongoing dialogue on topics related to benefits and work.

A Guide to Disability Statistics from the National Health Interview Survey – Disability Supplement

The National Health Interview Survey - Disability supplement (NHIS-D) provides information that can be used to understand myriad topics related to health and disability. The survey provides comprehensive information on multiple disability conceptualizations that can be identified using information about health conditions (both physical and mental), activity limitations, and service receipt (e.g. SSI, SSDI, Vocational Rehabilitation). This provides flexibility for researchers in defining populations of interest. This paper provides a description of the data available in the NHIS-D and information on how the data can be used to better understand the lives of people with disabilities.

Disability in a Technology-Driven Workplace

New Internet and Web-based technology applications have meant significant cost and time efficiencies to many American businesses. However, many employers have not yet fully grasped the impact of these new information and communication technologies on applicants and employees with certain disabilities such as vision impairments, hearing problems or limited dexterity. Although not all applicants and employees who have a disability may experience IT-access problems, to select groups it can pose a needless barrier. The increasing dominance of IT in the workplace presents both a challenge and an opportunity for workers with disabilities and their employers. It will be up to HR professionals to ensure that Web-based HR processes and workplace technologies are accessible to their employees with disabilities. .