Implementation of job development practices.

Migliore et al. (2012) asked employment consultants how they help adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities find jobs. They sent a survey to a national sample of these consultants. The survey listed key practices that research says work best, like involving families, customizing jobs, and studying what employers need.

The answers showed spotty use of those best practices. Some consultants involved families; most did not. Few tailored jobs to fit both the worker and the employer. Overall, the survey painted a picture of uneven, low-quality job development.

Davison et al. (1995) saw the same gap in adult residential homes. Staff there also skipped proven tactics like task analysis and functional assessment. The pattern is old and stubborn.

Lyons et al. (2022) flips the script. When a small group of providers actually used active, person-centered job development, more adults landed competitive jobs. The problem is not the method; it is the follow-through.

Butterworth et al. (2024) zooms out. Their 2024 review says employment rates for adults with IDD are still terrible after forty years of programs. Migliore et al. (2012) helps explain why: the people running the programs are not using the playbook.

If you write plans or supervise employment services, do not assume the job developer is using evidence-based steps. Ask for the data. Add a checklist to the ISP that requires family input, job carving, and employer needs analysis. One quick audit can tell you if your client is getting real supported employment or just a generic job search.