Data Note
No. 44, 2013
Source: The National Survey of State Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Day and Employment Services (Institute for Community Inclusion, State Data Project)
State Intellectual and Developmental Disability Agencies’ Service Trends
By Jean E. Winsor
In FY2011, an estimated 570,406 individuals received day or employment supports from state IDD program agencies. This number grew from 458,650 in FY1999. The estimated number of individuals in integrated employment services increased from 108,296 in FY1999 to 110,295 in FY2011. State investment continues to emphasize facility-based and non-work services, rather than integrated employment services. Figure 1 shows the trends in the percentage of people served in integrated employment and facility-based and non-work settings between FY2004 and FY2011.
Major findings include the following:
•	National estimates suggest that there has been modest growth in the number of individuals in integrated employment since 1988.
•	The estimated percentage of individuals participating in integrated employment services was 19.3 in FY2011.
•	Growth in supported employment primarily occurred between the mid-1980s and mid-1990s, and there has not been a meaningful change in the number of people with IDD in integrated employment since 2001.
•	Growth in community-based non-work services has continued for states that report on this service.
•	There is large variation across states in participation in integrated employment (Table 1).

Since Fiscal Year 1988, the Institute for Community Inclusion has administered the National Survey of Day and Employment Programs for People with Developmental Disabilities to state Intellectual and Developmental Disability (IDD) Agencies. The work is funded by the Administration on Developmental Disabilities and is designed to describe the nature of day and employment services for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Figure 1. Estimated IDD Agency Service Distribution by Year
*Percents displayed represent estimates for the number of people served in integrated employment nationally including all 50 states and Washington, DC.

Table 1. Participation in Day and Employment Services in FY2011
State	Total 
Served	Percent Integrated Employment	Percent Community-based Non-work	Percent Facility-based Work	Percent Facility-based Non-work	
AK	1,506	27	0	0	95	
AL	4,945	5	-	1	94	
AR	- 1	-	-	-	-	
AZ	6,821	19	0	12	69	
CA	75,450	14	72	14	0	
CO	8,679	21	67	-	59.5	
CT	9,313	51	49	6	0	
DC	1,691	21	0	0	76	
DE	-	-	-	-	-	
FL	15,940	20	-	-	-	
GA	5,133	52	100	0	-	
HI	-	-	-	-	-	
IA	9,587	20	-	29.5	50.5	
ID	-	-	-	-	-	
IL	26,338	9	0	7.5	83	
IN	11,768	19	58.5	36	42	
KS	5,789	15	-	-	-	
KY	4,674	9	45	0	96	
LA	5,009	33	0	31.5	36	
MA	14,751	25	16	24.5	54	
MD	12,343	40	0	0	60	
ME	-	-	-	-	-	
MI	17,098	23	39.5	26	25	
MN	14,043	19	-	82.5	-	
MO	4,785	6	4	0	93	
MS	2,950	11	0	27	61.5	
MT	1,819	13	-	-	-	
NC	14,831	20	50	21	27	
ND	-	-	-	-	-	
NE	4,805	5	21	6.5	64.5	
NH	2,639	49	45.5	3	0	
NJ	-	-	-	-	-	
NM	3,240	37	29	0	75	
NV	2,253	23	1	43	33	
NY	69,163	13	62	20.5	2	
OH	32,761	24	-	52	36	
OK	4,056	61	29	55.5	0	
OR	10,791	34	41	23.5	26	
PA	24,460	15	6.5	40.5	38.5	
RI	3,0292	26	58.5	30.5	71	
SC	7,309	30	12	38	42	
SD	2,416	18	28	67	31.5	
TN	6,4463	18	-	-	-	
TX	46,680	5	36	-	-	
UT	2,819	27	80	-	-	
VA	12,112	22	3.5	7	67.5	
VT	2,762	35	65	0	0	
WA	8,437	88	5	8.5	0.09	
WI	14,807	23	22	44	50	
WV	3,815	22	-	12	-	
WY	1,367	17	0	9	73.5	

1 Data not available
2 Data provided from source outside of the state intellectual and developmental disabilities agency
3 Data provided from source outside of the state intellectual and developmental disabilities agency
Suggested Citation
Winsor, J. E. (2013). State intellectual and developmental disability agencies’ service trends. DataNote Series, DataNote 44. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts Boston, Institute for Community Inclusion. 

This is a publication of StateData.info, funded in part by the Administration on Developmental Disabilities, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (#90DN0216).
StateData.info is a project of the Institute for Community Inclusion at UMass Boston