1. SSDI Beneficiaries – Socio-demographic Factors
Predictors of Outcomes for
SSDI Beneficiaries – Socio-demographic Factors
J. Martin Giesen & Brenda S. Cavenaugh

2. Broad Project Overview
Focus: Consumers of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services
Blind or visually impaired (BVI) and
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries
Goals: What factors affect competitive employment outcome?
Identify:
What Hurts (Risk factors)
What Helps (Facilitation factors)
What Works (best sets of services) – later phase
Strive for practice and policy recommendations to improve competitive outcomes
Approach:
Draw from previous outcome research
Research with all disabilities & research specific to persons who are blind or visually impaired
Examine recent national VR data
Multi-level:
Individual-level characteristics (e.g., education)
State- and agency-level (e.g., state unemployment rate)

3. Current Focus How Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors
Affect
Competitive Employment outcomes
For VR consumers who are SSDI beneficiaries and are blind or visually impaired (BVI)
Selected findings & implications

4. Background Why SSDI Beneficiaries?
Consider the Total Federal Budget (FY 2012)
~$3.8 Trillion
~$829 Billion annual federal cost for Social Security Administration (SSA) programs
(SSA at 22% - is largest single expenditure in Federal Budget)
Within SSA
~$200 billion annually for SSDI and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) expenditures

5. Dept of Education - RSA
2013 – About $3 billion available to state VR agencies for employment-related services
>25% of all VR consumers are SSA beneficiaries
About 1/3 of VR consumers who are legally blind are SSDI beneficiaries (2008 data)
In 2010 also 33% (4308 of 13,021 legally blind)
SSDI population generally considered at greater risk for poor employment outcomes
How much? (we’ll see)

6. Background: Why SSDI Beneficiaries?
Considering program costs and goals both SSA and the VR Program would have interest in improved employment outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries – including those who are blind or visually impaired (BVI)

7. Some Study Details Purpose Data What affects competitive employment
Of SSDI-beneficiary consumers with visual impairments in VR
Determine what predicts competitive employment:
Consumer factors
State factors
Agency factors
Data
RSA Case Service Report-911 data: 4,478 consumers (FY 2010), age 18 to 75, legally blind or visually impaired, were receiving SSDI at application, and were…
CLOSED AFTER RECEIVING SERVICES!

8. What is Competitive Employment?
Competitive Employment Closure
Included employment in an integrated setting, self-employment, Business Enterprise Program (BEP), and supported employment in an integrated setting; and was full or part-time, and compensated at the maximum of the State or Federal minimum wage (RSA Case Service Report, 2008).
Noncompetitive Closure
Included homemaker, unpaid family worker, or when the above income criterion was not met, and
Unsuccessful closures–those who exited without an employment outcome, after receiving VR services (Old Status 28).
(Includes Extended Employment)
(Note: not the same as Competitive employment indicator in RSA Case Service Report, due to inclusions of Unsuccessfuls.)

9. Predictors Individual Level Age at application Race/ethnicity (5)
Cognitive secondary disability
Noncognitive secondary disability
Legal blindness vs. VI, not LB
Education level at application
Earnings at application
SSDI amount at application
SSI recipient at application

10. Predictors State or Agency Level State Population
State Unemployment Rate
State Per Capita Income
State Agency Structure Type
blindness vs. combined or general
Note: blindness agencies serve consumers who are BVI; combined agencies serve all disabilities; general agencies serve consumers not BVI.
Predictors not discussed served as “controls”

11. Analysis Method
Logistic Multilevel Modeling (HLM) – type of multiple regression
Special advantages – three ways employment outcomes can be effected
Direct Effects – from Consumer factors
Direct Effects – from State or agency factors
Interactions of Consumer and State/agency factors – called “cross-level interaction”

12. Expectations and Perspective
Old research found receipt of SSI or SSDI, or both were risk factors (detrimental) for employment.
Disincentives for employment
In the 1970s, realizing placement difficulties, the VR Program had counselors with caseloads that were devoted to SSI & SSDI recipients. (co-author)
Present study looked at just SSDI recipients (although small number were also SSI recipients)
What Would You Expect –
How much lower for competitive closure rate of SSDI consumers vs. all consumers who are BVI?
10, 20, 30, or 35% lower?
600 were SSI at appl.

13. Findings: Competitive Employment Rates
Found: About 10% lower – surprising!
About 48% of a recent audience of VR administrators & staff guessed “30% lower.”
The overall competitive closure rate for all consumers who are BVI was 53%.
The rate for the subsample receiving SSDI was 43%.
only about 10% lower
Understand we included all consumers with employment outcomes plus those closed unsuccessfully after services in computing our rates. Different from RSA indicator that only includes those with employment outcomes.
9% difference - 82% vs. 73% if using RSA-Defined competitive closure, but has 40% reduction in sample size

14. Implications
Now appears that SSDI recipients may have substantial employment potential.
Perhaps SSDI-recipient consumers have been “under-rated” in terms of their potential for competitive employment.
Decades-old thinking that SSDI or SSI receipt creates disincentives for employment. These receipts are negative factors, but for BVI consumers may not be as great as previously thought.
Lack of specificity in thinking - “combining” SSI and SSDI recipients and thinking the same way about both of these. Possible?
“Combining” often done in older outcome research, which found receipt was negative factor.
Is VR – at least VR serving consumers who are BVI– doing a better job? A viable possibility.

15. Findings: Economic Factors
At application-
Weekly earnings – receipt vs. non-receipt
SSDI amount
What do you think would be the effect of each of these factors on the rate of competitive employment?

16. Findings: Economic Factors
Chance of competitive employment increases for BOTH presence of weekly earnings and higher amounts of SSDI
Were you at all surprised that CE rate increased for both?
About 45% of a recent audience of VR administrators & staff guessed “increase for weekly earnings but not for higher SSDI checks.”

17. Observations: Economic Factors
Earnings and SSDI receipt indicate employment
Current or previous
Other research with adults and transition-age youth—plus cross-disability studies—say work experience is very important for subsequent employment
1) Our findings further support importance of work experience in increasing the likelihood of competitive employment.
2) Our SSDI sample has sufficient work quarters to qualify for SSDI, and payment amounts reflect duration and/or level of previous work.
Given this - Not surprising this group has reasonable base rate of competitive employment (as seen).

18. Findings: Glorious Interactions
Interactions with Agency Structure Type and Individual factors
Age at application and Agency Structure
But first, let’s consider competitive employment rate trends by age.
How would chance of competitive employment change as age increases (starting at about 18 to 65 and older)?

19. Interaction – Age and Agency Structure
Overall – competitive employment rate increases and peaks in mid-to-late 30s, then declines for those older at application but…
Agency structure had a strong impact on this trend:
As age at application increased, those served in blindness agencies had a higher competitive employment rate
Those served in combined or general agencies had a declining competitive rate
Graph shows patterns

21. Interaction – Age and Agency Structure
Older SSDI clients (mid-30s or older) did better in blindness agencies than in combined or general agencies.
Service in blindness agencies mitigated the general decline in competitive employment rate with increased consumer age.
New evidence that consumers tend to have better outcomes when served in agencies exclusively serving consumers who are BVI
Implications for Policy?

22. Interaction – Race and Agency Structure
Asian consumers overall had a lower chance of competitive employment (relative to White), but
Asians clearly did better when served in blindness agencies
Reasons unclear but this discovery adds, yet again, to evidence of heightened effectiveness of blindness agencies

23. What about Competitive Employment for Other Race or Ethnicity Groups?
What differences would you expect in competitive employment rate between white, African American, Hispanic consumers?

24. Findings: Race and Ethnicity
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES in chance of competitive employment among African American, White, and Hispanic consumers!
Highly unexpected!
Only about 23% of a recent audience of VR administrators & staff expected there would be no differences.
Amazing and historic finding!
Recently, Hispanics have fared as well as (or better than) Whites.
African American consumers have consistently not done as well – until now.
Statistical Accident??
We say NO. With N= 4,478 we have tremendous statistical power to detect differences – if present.

25. Implications: Lack of Race Differences
Why no differences?
Almost all previous employment outcome research has utilized ALL VR consumers
We investigated consumers receiving SSDI
Key difference: Virtually all SSDI consumers had history of work experience
Suggest their work experiences have a “leveling effect” – appearing to moderate race differences on chance of subsequent employment
If so, enhanced work experiences during VR process may be important for overcoming race/ethnicity differences in employment outcomes

26. Final Thoughts
Findings for work history point to the importance of work experience—a broad effect across age and disability groups.
Consumers need to participate in as many work experiences as available, as well as take opportunities for work experiences during the VR process.
Our findings – for Asian, female (not discussed), and a wide age range of older consumers—add to existing evidence of the advantages of services in blindness agencies and of specialized services in general.

27. More Details
Other findings – for this study may be found in other NRTC dissemination products, on our website, and in research publication.
Read More About It:
Giesen, J. M. & Cavenaugh, B. S. (2013). Disability insurance beneficiaries with visual impairments in vocational rehabilitation: Socio-demographic influences on employment. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 107(6),