Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026
Implementing a Co-produced Curriculum for Neurodivergent Individuals in the Workplace.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
VanDaalen Rachel A, Hsiao Yu Jie Emily, Zhao Jiayuan Lyrid, Karsting Hannah, Woo Seungmin Mina, Zhen Cai, McGovern Mark, Fung Lawrence K
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD), especially autistic individuals, are disproportionately unemployed and underemployed. Job coaches (JCs), family members (FMs), and employers can serve as supports to improve employment outcomes of adults with I/DD. To train these individuals to provide effective, strengths-based support, our team co-designed and co-produced a training curriculum entitled DIVERSE. In this study, we sought to understand barriers and facilitators to implement DIVERSE in the community.
METHODS: We utilized a mixed-methods effectiveness-implementation hybrid design to determine the barriers and facilitators to implementation of DIVERSE. A total of 78 participants, including JCs, parents, and employers, completed the DIVERSE training and at least one quantitative survey. Twenty-five individuals were randomly selected to complete semi-structured interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Transcripts of interviews were analyzed by thematic analysis.
RESULTS: High levels of DIVERSE acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness were found in all participant groups. Qualitative results indicated more facilitators than barriers and more similarities across groups than differences. Major facilitators included the perception that DIVERSE is helpful and easy to complete, its fulfillment of a need in the community, and its compatibility with personal or organizational values. Major barriers included participants' individual needs for specific curriculum content and meeting each individual's expectations of the scope of topics covered in the curriculum.
CONCLUSIONS: DIVERSE is a feasible, acceptable, and appropriate training for supporters of individuals with I/DD. Facilitators and barriers to implementing DIVERSE will be used to further disseminate the curriculum at a larger scale.
METHODS: We utilized a mixed-methods effectiveness-implementation hybrid design to determine the barriers and facilitators to implementation of DIVERSE. A total of 78 participants, including JCs, parents, and employers, completed the DIVERSE training and at least one quantitative survey. Twenty-five individuals were randomly selected to complete semi-structured interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Transcripts of interviews were analyzed by thematic analysis.
RESULTS: High levels of DIVERSE acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness were found in all participant groups. Qualitative results indicated more facilitators than barriers and more similarities across groups than differences. Major facilitators included the perception that DIVERSE is helpful and easy to complete, its fulfillment of a need in the community, and its compatibility with personal or organizational values. Major barriers included participants' individual needs for specific curriculum content and meeting each individual's expectations of the scope of topics covered in the curriculum.
CONCLUSIONS: DIVERSE is a feasible, acceptable, and appropriate training for supporters of individuals with I/DD. Facilitators and barriers to implementing DIVERSE will be used to further disseminate the curriculum at a larger scale.