Coordinated Employment Opportunities
Hartford, Connecticut

Contact:

John Halliday
BRS
25 Sigourney Street, 11th Floor
Hartford, CT 06106
Phone: 860-424-4848
Fax: 860-427-4850
Email: gomezm@pcnet.com

Mission

The purpose of the Coordinated Employment Opportunities (CEO) project is to develop and implement a comprehensive model to increase the self-determination and integrated community employment of youth and young adults with serious mental illness (SMI) or serious emotional disturbance (SED).

NTA Framework Categories

• Student-Focused Planning and Development
• Career Pathways and Contextual Learning
• Business, Labor, and Community Involvement

Description

Coordinated Employment Opportunities (CEO) is a highly individualized, person-centered model designed to serve the needs of two target populations with SED/SMI: 1) in-school youth ages 17 to 21 who are in their last two years of high school; and 2) out-of-school-youth ages 17-26. The project had two sites, the City of Bridgeport, an Enterprise Community, and the Greater Hartford area, urban areas with a high percentage of poor people and people from minority backgrounds. A total of 109 participants were served, 63% were in

school at the time of referral and 65% were from minority backgrounds.

Two full-time Employment Coordinators from minority backgrounds lived in the community where they worked. An Employment Coordinator worked directly with each participant through all stages of the program with support from the Job Developer/Job Coach.

Comprehensive services provided by project staff included:

• referral and service coordination with State VR services (BRS);
• referral and coordination with others;
• self-advocacy skills and social skills;
• job seeking and job keeping skills;
• situational assessments or internships with approximately 40 to 80 hours of work experience in competitive work settings with training stipends paid by the project and support provided by the employer and/or CEO staff;
• job placement;
• on-the-job training or job coaching; and
• follow-along support including 24-hour beeper access for crisis intervention and ongoing contact.

The model approach encouraged the use of existing services, both special and generic, that continue to be in place after grant funds ceased. Supports provided to address barriers to employment included family support (working with parents, siblings or partners); peer support; assistance regarding essential life needs (child care, transportation, housing, crisis intervention); referral, advocacy and assistance with obtaining treatment (psychiatric treatment, addiction services, medical and dental treatment); advocacy and assistance with school or obtaining postsecondary training (Job Corp, vocational training programs, college) and linkage to ongoing supports including mentors, e-mail linkage, community groups, BRS and other agencies.

Over 80% of the total served, and 96% of those who stayed in the project at least seven months, had work experience in a competitive work setting while in the project. Over two thirds held competitive jobs and averaged six months of employment in one or more jobs. About one-third attended college or a postsecondary training program.

• All 109 participants were referred to the Bureau of Rehabilitation Services (BRS).
• Seventy-nine percent (86) received services from BRS
• Three were found to be ineligible by BRS; the rest did not want services, did not follow-through, or moved.
• Of the 109 (includes those who moved, were incarcerated, in residential treatment, dropped out, or who left for college or other reasons during the three year project):
• 82% had work experience in a competitive work setting including internships paid by the project and work paid by the employer.
• 63% had competitive jobs during the project with work paid by the employer.
• 48% had internships or situational assessments with training stipends paid by the project.
• 75% of those who obtained employment maintained a job for at least 90 days.
• 80% of those employed maintained a job for at least 60 days.
• Participants averaged 6 months of employment (over 180 days) at one or more jobs during the project.
• Hourly wage (highest earned by each participant) averaged about $6.30.
• Of the 73 who were active in the project seven months or more - Average of 22 months in the project:
• 96% had work experience in a competitive work setting including internships paid by the project and work paid by the employer.
• 78% had at least one competitive job during the project.
• 58% had one or more internship or situational assessment.
• 81% of those employed maintained employment for 90 days or more.
• Hourly wage (highest earned by each participant) averaged about $6.25.
• Of those who were still active at the end of the project (64):
• 61% were employed;
• 30% were in college or a postsecondary training program, including 17% who were employed and attending college or a training program while working.
• 17% were still attending high school.
• There were no significant differences in employment outcomes for those who entered the project while still in high school versus those who entered after leaving school showing that the project worked equally well regarding employment for both groups.

Control Group Study: Comparison of CEO Participants with BRS clients (no CEO)

A comparison of the Bureau of Rehabilitation Services’ records (October 20, 1998) for CEO and control group members who did not participate in CEO found:

• The majority of both groups had Employment Plans developed by BRS counselors (Control 88%; CEO 78%) and the two groups did not differ significantly regarding length of time from BRS application to plan development.
• The amount of time from date of application to any type of BRS case closure was significantly less for CEO participants than for control group members.
• The amount of time from date of plan development to any type of BRS case closure was significantly less for CEO participants than for control group members
• Control group members had significantly more unsuccessful closures than CEO participants did (28% CEO vs. 60% control group).
• There were no significant differences regarding successful closures of 90 or more continuous days of employment (23% CEO vs. 22% control group).
• More CEO participants were still open with BRS (48% CEO vs. 18% control group); open cases may continue to receive services and may achieve successful closure.
• BRS spent significantly more dollars on the 61 control group members (average of $4370) than the 82 CEO participants (average of $999).
• To summarize, CEO participants achieved the same percentage of successful outcomes and significantly lower unsuccessful outcomes as the control group in significantly less time and less cost to BRS.

Success Story

I met Milly, a 17-year-old Puerto Rican young woman, in the fall of 1996. Her BRS counselor, who had worked with Milly’s entire family in her previous job at a local mental health clinic, referred Milly to me. Milly was diagnosed with "Social Phobia" and had "trouble" with school attendance since second grade. She had functionally dropped out of school when I met her. Her BRS counselor, in her previous role as mental health counselor, had occasionally provided intense services that included picking her up and taking her to school. This worked for a while but then Milly would just not respond. My initial meetings with her were positive. Even though she did not know me she had heard of me from her BRS counselor.

In October of 96 Milly’s BRS counselor invited her to a three-day Experiencing Diversity workshop and Milly agreed to go with her brother and her friend. I also attended this workshop, which is based on Carl Rogers Person Centered Therapy and emphasizes deep listening, unconditional positive regard and genuineness with oneself and others. Milly’s mere agreement to "leave town" was an accomplishment. At this workshop she demonstrated skills and insights which were rapidly recognized and valued by the group. By the end of the workshop she had made connections with new people from several different states. She wanted to become part of the staff and in addition she and the other "young persons" who attended wanted to recruit more young people and have another workshop in the spring. She accomplished both.

Milly left the first workshop with a desire to complete her education but wanted to explore ways other than returning to New Britain High School (this still seemed like a difficult task). Much of Milly’s struggle comes from wanting a High School Diploma and not a GED. However she was not comfortable with any of the available options. We decided to focus on work for a while. I developed a situational assessment opportunity at DiLoretto Magnet School of Communication and Technology. She really enjoyed the positive atmosphere at this school where Milly was an aide to the 5th grade teacher and also helped out in the office when necessary. The principal of the school was learning how to speak Spanish and it was a proud moment for Milly to be teaching the PRINCIPAL Spanish. She completed the situational assessment at the Magnet School and received the United Way Volunteer of the Year award having been nominated by DiLoretto staff. Simultaneously Milly pursued a maintenance job opportunity where her mother was working. She worked part time until August of 1997 when I gave her a job lead with Excel Cleaning where the rate of pay was higher. Milly applied and was hired. She has continues to work for almost two years and has received several promotions and salary increases. One thing she has learned from both these experiences is that she does not want to "clean" the rest of her life and that learning can be fun.

Much to my surprise Milly said she wanted to return to the High School since it appeared to be the best way she could try to fill in the gaps of knowledge she had missed. She wanted to pursue college and knew that she needed more than a piece of paper saying she graduated. She returned to the High School and did well for a while, but began experiencing anxiety and related issues at home and did not complete the school year. Milly went back to school this fall (September 1998) and has not missed a single day. She has experienced incredible personal growth that will affect her long-term employability and future

Coordinated Employment Opportunities for Youth and Young Adults with Serious Emotional Disturbance or Mental Illness: Final Performance Report. • Diane Liebert Espinola and Barbara J. Helms • Capital Region Education Council, Hartford,CT. • January 30, 1999.

Back 1999 Directory Home Page

Back to TRI Home Page