OBJECTIVE: The goal was to build a strategy before implementing individual placement and support (IPS) in the country, leveraging existing facilitators and mitigating, as much as possible, identified barriers. METHODS: A qualitative study called "group analysis" was conducted: Over 2 days, two groups of stakeholders were invited for a whole-day workshop to collect information on facilitators and barriers faced by existing programs. RESULTS: Many perceived facilitators were related to some guidelines or key principles of the IPS model. Main barriers were lack of long-time job support, lack of funding, lack of communication between stakeholders, social or financial insecurity of the beneficiary, denial of their own disease, high hiring selectivity, and on-the-job requirements by employers looking to maintain a competitive workforce. The four points of divergence between participants in relation with IPS were (a) the (dis)advantages of internships and trainings compared to standard work contracts, (b) the risk associated with the communication of a medical diagnosis and the disclosure issue, (c) the best time to start a job search or to return to work, and (d) whether priority should be given to the search for an adapted job or the adaptation of existing jobs to the specific needs of the beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: The IPS model appears as a potential solution to many issues faced by stakeholders in Belgium in charge of helping people with moderate to severe mental illness to find a job. A stronger legal framework could help to achieve the integration of such model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: The goal was to build a strategy before implementing individual placement and support (IPS) in the country, leveraging existing facilitators and mitigating, as much as possible, identified barriers. METHODS: A qualitative study called "group analysis" was conducted: Over 2 days, two groups of stakeholders were invited for a whole-day workshop to collect information on facilitators and barriers faced by existing programs. RESULTS: Many perceived facilitators were related to some guidelines or key principles of the IPS model. Main barriers were lack of long-time job support, lack of funding, lack of communication between stakeholders, social or financial insecurity of the beneficiary, denial of their own disease, high hiring selectivity, and on-the-job requirements by employers looking to maintain a competitive workforce. The four points of divergence between participants in relation with IPS were (a) the (dis)advantages of internships and trainings compared to standard work contracts, (b) the risk associated with the communication of a medical diagnosis and the disclosure issue, (c) the best time to start a job search or to return to work, and (d) whether priority should be given to the search for an adapted job or the adaptation of existing jobs to the specific needs of the beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: The IPS model appears as a potential solution to many issues faced by stakeholders in Belgium in charge of helping people with moderate to severe mental illness to find a job. A stronger legal framework could help to achieve the integration of such model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).