Ari K Mwachofi1. 1. Department of Health Administration and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73104, USA. amwachof@ouhsc.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study replicated the one that was conducted 30 years ago to determine systematic gender differences in access and outcomes of vocational rehabilitation services (VRS). METHODS: Unlike the original study that was confined to Region V, this study examined case management data from 653,206 cases that were closed by State VRS in 2004 in all states. It used a t-test to analyse gender differences in access to VRS and intervention outcomes in education, employment, earnings and dependence on public support. The study also conducted multivariate analysis to determine the effects of gender on VRS intervention outcomes. RESULTS: The study found differences similar to those found 30 years ago. Although women had better educational outcomes, they had lower employment and earnings and greater dependence on needs-based public support than did men. A disturbing finding is that the gender employment and earnings gaps were wider after VRS interventions than before. After controlling for other factors, the study found that gender is a significant predictor of earnings and employment outcomes. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that men with disabilities stand a better chance of escaping poverty than do women. There is a need for changes in VRS service provision that ensures equity in quality of services which might translate into more equitable employment and earnings outcomes.
PURPOSE: This study replicated the one that was conducted 30 years ago to determine systematic gender differences in access and outcomes of vocational rehabilitation services (VRS). METHODS: Unlike the original study that was confined to Region V, this study examined case management data from 653,206 cases that were closed by State VRS in 2004 in all states. It used a t-test to analyse gender differences in access to VRS and intervention outcomes in education, employment, earnings and dependence on public support. The study also conducted multivariate analysis to determine the effects of gender on VRS intervention outcomes. RESULTS: The study found differences similar to those found 30 years ago. Although women had better educational outcomes, they had lower employment and earnings and greater dependence on needs-based public support than did men. A disturbing finding is that the gender employment and earnings gaps were wider after VRS interventions than before. After controlling for other factors, the study found that gender is a significant predictor of earnings and employment outcomes. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that men with disabilities stand a better chance of escaping poverty than do women. There is a need for changes in VRS service provision that ensures equity in quality of services which might translate into more equitable employment and earnings outcomes.