Does job coaching really work?

August 9, 2010

Can a government-sponsored job coaching program for individuals with intellectual disabilities really help someone get a job?

That’s what a team of USC researchers wanted to find out when they looked into a statewide job-coaching program offered through the S.C. Department of Disabilities and Special Needs (DDSN).

“We’ve been collecting data on special needs-individuals in South Carolina for 13 years, focusing on both prevention of disabilities and issues,” said Suzanne McDermott, a professor in the School of Medicine’s Department of Family and . “As we turned our attention to people with intellectual disabilities who want to earn a real wage, we wondered if government-supported job coaching programs really work—are the programs any more effective than someone just going out and finding a job without assistance?”

The question is particularly relevant for South Carolina, which administers a federally mandated job coaching effort to assist the roughly 10,000 citizens who have and the basic abilities to hold down a job.

“We did an economic analysis of the [job coaching] program to find out if it’s really making a difference and, if so, how much,” said Melayne McInnes, an economics professor who worked with McDermott and Joshua Mann from preventive medicine and economics department colleague Orgul Ozturk. “As economists, Orgul and I really wanted to know if there was selection bias coming into play. In other words, were the people being assisted by job coaching the kind of people who could have found a job anyway without help?”

Turns out the job-coaching program is enormously beneficial, even when accounting for the selection bias factor. Only 9 percent of those who found jobs did so without job coaching, while 56 percent of the intellectually disabled clients landed employment as a result of the job-coaching program.

“We know it’s possible that some of the apparent benefits of job coaching are due to underlying differences between those who receive coaching and those who do not,” Ozturk said. “Our study is the first to examine the effectiveness of job coaching while controlling for selection and existence of unobserved heterogeneity that might affect both job coaching and employment outcomes biasing the estimates of the effect of job coaching.

“Even when you factor in those things that might bias the results, it’s apparent that individuals who receive job coaching are three-times more likely to be employed as those who weren’t job coached.”

While the study was not a cost-effectiveness analysis, the researchers noted that the average cost of a job-coached employment placement is $4,000 (half of all placements cost less than $3,000 per person), while serving individuals in day programs costs $7,400 annually.

“And that’s not even factoring in the taxes those working individuals are paying, plus the sense of well being and esteem that comes with holding down a job that pays a living wage,” McInnes said.

Explore further: Why 'Coach' is usually a bloke

Related Stories

Why 'Coach' is usually a bloke

March 5, 2008

New research shows women defer to men when it comes to coaching youth sport and have little confidence in their own ability.

Hiring practices influenced by beauty

December 6, 2007

A new study published in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences finds that the attractiveness of interviewees can significantly bias outcome in hiring practices, showing a clear distinction between the attractive and ...

Women, minorities face special hurdles in job market

August 17, 2009

A new study from North Carolina State University shows that white men receive significantly more tips about job opportunities than women and racial minorities - particularly among people in upper management positions - highlighting ...

Recommended for you

New paper answers causation conundrum

November 17, 2017

In a new paper published in a special issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, SFI Professor Jessica Flack offers a practical answer to one of the most significant, and most confused questions in evolutionary ...

Chance discovery of forgotten 1960s 'preprint' experiment

November 16, 2017

For years, scientists have complained that it can take months or even years for a scientific discovery to be published, because of the slowness of peer review. To cut through this problem, researchers in physics and mathematics ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.