The cost-effectiveness of supported employment for adults with autism in the United Kingdom.
Supported employment for autistic adults costs only £18 per extra week worked and can save public money compared to day services.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Mavranezouli et al. (2014) compared two paths for autistic adults in the UK. One group used supported employment. The other used traditional day services.
The team tracked how many weeks each person worked and what taxpayers paid for housing, day care, and job help.
What they found
Supported employment added one extra week of work for only £18.
When the researchers counted housing and service savings, the job program cost less overall than day services.
How this fits with other research
Cimera et al. (2012) warned that sending adults to sheltered workshops first raises costs and lowers pay. Ifigeneia’s numbers show the same pattern: skip workshops and go straight to supported employment.
Wehman et al. (2017) later pushed the idea further. Their Project SEARCH plus ABA supports landed 90% of autistic youth in jobs. The UK study proves the money side: even modest job gains still pay for themselves.
Maddox et al. (2015) reviewed ten studies and called the evidence “small and weak.” Ifigeneia’s cost data help fill that gap by giving funders hard numbers to defend the investment.
Why it matters
You can now tell funders that every £18 spent on supported employment buys an extra week of work and may save money on housing and day services. Use this figure when you write transition plans or defend job-coach hours in an IEP meeting.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a line to the next ITP that cites the £18 cost per extra work week when you request ongoing job-coach funding.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Adults with autism face high rates of unemployment. Supported employment enables individuals with autism to secure and maintain a paid job in a regular work environment. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of supported employment compared with standard care (day services) for adults with autism in the United Kingdom. Thus, a decision-analytic economic model was developed, which used outcome data from the only trial that has evaluated supported employment for adults with autism in the United Kingdom. The main analysis considered intervention costs, while cost-savings associated with changes in accommodation status and National Health Service and personal social service resource use were examined in secondary analyses. Two outcome measures were used: the number of weeks in employment and the quality-adjusted life year. Supported employment resulted in better outcomes compared with standard care, at an extra cost of £18 per additional week in employment or £5600 per quality-adjusted life year. In secondary analyses that incorporated potential cost-savings, supported employment dominated standard care (i.e. it produced better outcomes at a lower total cost). The analysis suggests that supported employment schemes for adults with autism in the United Kingdom are cost-effective compared with standard care. Further research needs to confirm these findings.
Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2014 · doi:10.1177/1362361313505720