VR-IL Selection Criteria

Selection criteria are classified into five areas: 1) program/practice goals and objectives, 2) target populations, 3) program/practice processes, 4) program/practice outcomes, and 5) overall assessment. Criteria and evaluation questions are provided below for each area.

Project staff gathered data from the collaborations through written questionnaires and telephone interviews. The Expert Panel then reviewed the data and applied the selection criteria to identify exemplary collaborations.

1. Program/Practice Goals and Objectives

A. Clarity of goals, objectives, and identified need:

Are program goals specific?
Are job placement and/or job retention specified as goals or objectives?
Is the problem/need to be addressed clearly defined?
Are specific, measurable outcomes identified?
To what extent are objectives consistent with goals?
Are measures specified for each objective?

B. Clarity of authority under which the program was created:

Does the program operate under official authority, i.e. state law, federal law, local law and/or department/board policy?
Does the authority identify the scope of the program (e.g. what services it should provide)?
Does the authority identify the intensity of services (frequency, duration)?

C. Clarity and inclusiveness of the target population:

To what extent is the target population clearly specified?
To what extent does the program serve individuals with severe levels of disability?
To what extent are underserved populations included?

2. Program/Practice Processes

These criteria were intended to measure how, rather than with what success, a program carries out its mission.

A. Program/practice consistency:

To what extent is outread appropriate for target population?
To what extent are services appropriate for program goals?

B. Responsiveness to consumers:

To what extent does the program provide access to consumers with significant barriers?
To what extent do consumers have a role in the design and/or governance of the service program?
To what extent do consumers have choice in selection of: vocational goals, services purchased, placements, etc.?
Is there a method to assess or document consumer satisfaction?
Is there a method to incorporate consumer satisfaction data into service delivery improvement efforts?

C. Adequacy of Documentation:

Is up-to-date service information available?
To what extent is service provision documented?
If available, is up-to-date service information comprehensive?
To what extent are other project activities documented?
Are outcomes measured at specific intervals? (e.g. completion of services, 60 days, 120 days, 180 days, or other interval?)
Can the program provide information to determine costs relative to benefits per participant?

3. Program/Practice Quality of Collaboration

These criteria addressed the quality of the collaborative relationship between the VR agency and the ILC.

To what extent does the program serve consumers from the VR agency (local, regional, statewide)?
To what extent does the program serve consumers from the participating ILC or ILCs?
How stable is the collaborative program or practice?
How frequent is the contact between the ILC staff and VR agency staff?
To what extent does each party have a sense of understanding of its collaborating partner's roles and responsibilities?
To what extent does each party believe the other fulfills its obligations in the collaboration?
To what extent does VR staff involved in the collaboration trust ILC staff to be committed to the goals of the collaboration, and vice versa?
Is the collaboration sustainable over time?

4. Outcomes

These criteria were meant to assess the effect the program has on its consumers.

To what extent does the program achieve positive results in job placement, job retention, or achieving self-employment goals?

5. Overall Assessment

These criteria were intended to provide additional measures of meritorious programs and practices.

To what extent is the program appropriate, engaging, and motivating for its intended audience?
To what extent does the program embody a novel/important approach to addressing the employment problems of people with disabilities?
Can the program be replicated in another location with the expectation that similar results will be obtained?

Comments or Questions? Email us.