The state of the science of employment and economic self-sufficiency for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Nord et al. (2013) read every paper they could find on jobs for adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities. They did not run a new experiment. They simply told the story of what past work had tried and whether it paid enough to live on.

The review covers decades of job coaches, sheltered workshops, and supported employment programs.

Most programs still leave adults with IDD earning below-poverty wages. The tools exist, but they rarely add up to real financial independence.

In short, the field keeps doing the same thing and hopes for different pay stubs.

Matson et al. (2009) counted the numbers first. Their earlier review showed adults with ID have about three friends and get hired three to four times less than neighbors without disabilities. Derek et al. later explain why those gaps stay stuck: the programs do not scale or pay enough.

Tichá et al. (2023) tracked Pennsylvania data for six years after the target paper. They found community employment rates stayed flat, backing up Derek’s warning that little has changed.

Hewitt et al. (2013), written the same year, agrees good small programs exist but says we lack the data and policy muscle to grow them. Together the two 2013 reviews paint the same bleak picture from slightly different angles.

Titlestad et al. (2019) and Dudley et al. (2019) extend the worry beyond jobs. They show health surveys still miss most adults with IDD, meaning we cannot even count who needs help. Derek flagged broken employment supports; the later papers show the data pipes are broken too.

If you write job goals or supervise vocational programs, this paper is a wake-up call. Stop copying last decade’s plans. Instead, team up with funders to test models that pay at least minimum wage, track cost data, and build employer partnerships that last. Your clients deserve more than activity; they deserve a paycheck that pays the rent.