he MVCCS evaluated in this study appeared to substantially improve employment outcome for persons with BI without interventions. Results were better than projections based on the previous literature 80% of those served were placed in community-based work with 46% in independent community-based employment. Employment outcomes for persons who received vocational services through this project approached or exceeded outcomes reported previously for intensive rehabilitation interventions. Just as importantly, initial vocational placements were maintained at 1-year follow-up. At the follow-up interview, 81% were working in the community and 53% were employed independently without job supports. Although the results were equivalent to those of other rehabilitation programs that are based on best practices the authors could not make direct comparisons with those programs because we did not investigate specific interventions. Primary predictors of initial placement in the present study were time since injury and overall impairment/disability as measured by the Staff MPAI. Return to previous work should be considered especially for the more recently injured who have retained ties to their previous employer. Results indicate that more severe impairments and disabilities, as measured by the MPAI, are significant barriers to employment in the general population of persons with BI. However, for persons with TBI, the presence of additional non-brain injuries appears to be a more important factor.

The best predictor of employment level at 1-year follow-up was the level of initial placement. ISA (as measured by the difference between Rasch Staff MPAI and Rasch Survivor MPAI) did not contribute to the prediction of either initial placement or job maintenance. This finding is inconsistent with some other studies reporting an association between ISA and long-term employment after BI. The results suggest that ISA may be a barrier to employment that can be overcome through rehabilitation, through education and support for employers, and by discriminating placement of those persons with ISA in work environments that are more tolerant of limitations in self-awareness. Overall level of impairment and disability also appears to be a factor in time required for placement. In some cases, more intensive rehabilitation efforts, such as a CI day rehabilitation program, were required for more severely disabled persons so they could develop cognitive compensation, communication, behavioral self-management, social, and other pre-vocational skills required for eventual placement. Because of the time required for participation in such an intensive rehabilitation program, most individuals who participated in CI day rehabilitation required 6 to 12 months from the time they were admitted to services to their eventual placement. Our data suggest that most placements (92%) can be made within 1 year of admission to services. Preinjury years of education also contributed slightly to prediction of time to placement, with more highly educated individuals being placed more quickly.