ODEP OMB Reviewpkg Sep 28 07
ODEP OMB Reviewpkg Sep 28 07
Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities
OMB: 1230-0005
Paperwork
Reduction Act Submission:
Supporting
Statement for
the Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP)
Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities
Sept. 28, 2007
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION |
||||||||||||
Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement, and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503. |
||||||||||||
1. AGENCY/SUBAGENCY ORIGINATING REQUEST Department of Labor/ Office on Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) |
2. OMB CONTROL NUMBER a. b. NONE ___________ |
|||||||||||
3. TYPE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION (X one) (For b. – f., note item A2 of Supporting Statement instructions)
a. NEW COLLECTION b. REVISION OF A CURRENTLY APPROVED COLLECTION c. EXTENSION OF A CURRENTLY APPROVED COLLECTION d. REINSTATEMENT, WITHOUT CHANGE, OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COLLECTION FOR WHICH APPROVAL HAS EXPIRED e. REINSTATEMENT, WITHOUT CHANGE, OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COLLECTION FOR WHICH APPROVAL HAS EXPIRED f. EXISTING COLLECTION IN USE WITHOUT AN OMB CONTROL NUMBER |
4. TYPE OF REVIEW REQUESTED (X one)
a. REGULAR SUBMISSION b. EMERGENCY - APPROVAL REQUESTED BY: ___/___/___ c. DELEGATED |
|||||||||||
5. SMALL ENTITIES Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES NO |
||||||||||||
6. REQUESTED EXPIRATION DATE a. THREE YEARS FROM APPROVAL DATE b. OTHER |
||||||||||||
7. TITLE ODEP Information Requests from Employers in High Growth Industries |
||||||||||||
8. AGENCY FORM NUMBER(S) (if applicable) Not Applicable |
||||||||||||
9. KEYWORDS Employment, disability |
||||||||||||
10. ABSTRACT The Office of Disability Employment Policy is interested in assessing employer perspectives on the employment of people with disabilities and the services and support employers need to encourage them to recruit and hire persons with disabilities. Employers in 12 industry sectors, including high growth industries will be randomly selected by business size [small (5-14 employees), medium (15-249 employees), and large companies (250 or more employees)]. The interviews will be with senior executives. |
||||||||||||
11. AFFECTED PUBLIC (Mark primary with "P" and all others that apply with "X") |
12. OBLIGATION TO RESPOND (X one) |
|||||||||||
P b. BUSINESSES OR OTHER FOR-PROFIT c. NOT-FOR-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS |
d. FARM e. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT f. STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL GOVERNMENT |
a. VOLUNTARY b. REQUIRED TO OBTAIN OR RETAIN BENEFITS c. MANDATORY |
||||||||||
13. ANNUAL REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING HOUR BURDEN |
14. ANNUALIZED COST TO RESPONDENTS (in thousands of dollars) |
|
||||||||||
a. NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS |
3,600 |
a. TOTAL ANNUALIZED CAPITAL/STARTUP COSTS |
0.00 |
|||||||||
b. TOTAL ANNUAL RESPONSES |
3,600 |
b. TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS (O&M |
0.00 |
|||||||||
(1) Percentage of these responses collected electronically |
100% |
c. TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST REQUESTED |
0.00 |
|||||||||
c. TOTAL ANNUAL HOURS REQUESTED |
900 |
d. CURRENT OMB INVENTORY |
0 |
|||||||||
d. CURRENT OMB INVENTORY |
0 |
e. DIFFERENCE (+/-) |
0 |
|||||||||
e. DIFFERENCE (+/-) |
+900 |
f. EXPLANATION OF DIFFERENCE |
|
|||||||||
f. EXPLANATION OF DIFFERENCE |
(1) Program change (+/-) |
+900 |
(1) Program change (+/-) |
|
||||||||
|
(2) Adjustment (+/-) |
N/A |
(2) Adjustment (+/-) |
|
||||||||
15. PURPOSE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION (Mark primary with "P" and all others that apply with "X" |
16. FREQUENCY OF RECORDKEEPING OR REPORTING (X all that apply) a. RECORDKEEPING b. THIRD PARTY DISCLOSURE |
|||||||||||
a. APPLICATION FOR BENEFITS b. PROGRAM EVALUATION |
P e. PROGRAM PLANNING OR MANAGEMENT |
c. REPORTING (1) On Occasion |
(2) Weekly |
(3) Monthly |
||||||||
c. GENERAL PURPOSE STATISTICS |
X f. RESEARCH |
(4) Quarterly |
(5) Semi-annually |
(6) Annually |
||||||||
d. AUDIT |
g. REGULATORY OR COMPLIANCE |
(7) Biennially |
(8) Other (Describe) one- time |
|
||||||||
17. STATISTICAL METHODS |
18. AGENCY CONTACT (Person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) |
|||||||||||
Does this information collection employ statistical methods? YES NO |
a. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) Horne, Richard
|
b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 202-693-4923
|
||||||||||
a.
INDIVIDUALS OR HOUSEHOLDSOMB-83-I
OMB CONTROL NUMBER
|
TITLE Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities |
||
19. CERTIFICATION FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSIONS |
|||
a. PROGRAM OFFICAL CERTIFICATION |
|||
(1) Signature |
(2) Date
|
||
On behalf of this federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9.
NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8 (b) (3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.
The following is a summary of topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.
|
|||
b. SENIOR OFFICIAL OR DESIGNEE CERTIFICATION
|
|||
(1) Signature
|
(2) Date |
||
OMB FORM 83-I (BACK), 10/95
Table of Contents
A.3 Use of Information Technology to Reduce Burden 3
A.4 Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication and Ease Respondent Burden 4
A.5 Minimizing Burden on Small Entities 4
A.6 Consequences of Less Frequent Data Collection 4
A.8 Federal Register Notice and Consultation Outside the Agency 4
A.10 Assurances of Confidentiality 5
A.12 Hour Burden of Information Collection to Respondents 5
A.14 Annual Cost to the Federal Government 6
A.17 Display of Expiration Date of OMB Approval 7
B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods 8
B.1 Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods 8
B.2 Procedures for the Collection of Information 8
B.2.2 Data Collection Procedures 8
B.2.3.3 Precision Requirements and Sample Size 10
B.2.3.5 Sample Selection Method 15
B.2.3.6 Sampling Weights and Variance Estimation 15
B.2.3.7 Sample Survey Operations 17
B.3 Eliciting Cooperation/Maximizing Response Rates 17
List of Appendixes
Appendix
A Westat Assurance Of Confidentiality Agreement
B Survey Instrument
List of Tables
Table Page
B-1 Definition of Major Industry Sectors by 2002 NAIC Codes 10
B-2 Number of Companies by Major Industry Sector and Company Employee
Size Classes 11
B-3 Power of a Test for Difference in Proportions of Two Domains 13
B-4 Total Sample Size and Effective Sample Size by Industry Sector 14
B-5 Total Sample Size and Effective Sample Size by Company Size 14
List of Exhibits
Exhibit Page
A-1 Estimated Hour and Annual Cost Response Burden 6
A-2 Overall Cost to the Federal Government 6
A-3 Data Collection Timetable 7
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
A. Justification
A.1 Need for Information
The U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), under the Omnibus Appropriations Resolution, 2003, Public Law 1087; Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001, Public Law 106-554, 29 U.S.C. 557b, proposes to conduct a survey of employers’ perceptions on the employment of people with disabilities. The proposed survey of employers will build on the findings of previous employer surveys, with an emphasis on current attitudes and practices of employers in 12 industry sectors, including some high growth industries as projected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). ODEP is also interested in understanding employers’ perspectives about disability employment by company size and individuals at different levels organizationally within a given employer (e.g., Executive, Human Resources and Equal Employment Opportunity, front line supervisor or manager). The survey will be conducted by telephone by a survey firm utilizing computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) capability.
Previous surveys have documented employer response to the Americans with Disabilities Act and have identified barriers that employers experience or believe they will encounter in recruiting, hiring, retaining, and promoting workers with disabilities. For example, a recent telephone survey of 502 randomly selected private sector employers asked about employer views on people with disabilities in the workplace, accommodations, and economic issues. (Restricted Access: A Survey of Employers about People with Disabilities and Lowering Barriers to Work, March 2003, Rutgers, NJ: The John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development). There are several findings from the Restricted Access survey that need clarification and explanation. For example, when employers were asked what the greatest barrier to hiring persons with disabilities was, 32% of employers said the nature of work is such that people with disabilities cannot effectively perform it, while 22% answered they didn’t know. In another study, Disability Employment Policies and Practices in Private and Federal Sector Organizations, (2000) Cornell University found that 22% of employers identified attitudes and stereotypes as a significant barrier to employment for people with disabilities. In order to increase employment opportunities for persons with disabilities, it is important to know whether these beliefs are more prevalent in certain industries, vary by company size, or for certain job functions. The proposed survey will build on previous efforts and will focus on industry segments and company size to ask more detailed questions. The strength of this survey is its emphasis on a comprehensive sampling of industry sectors, including some high growth industries, company size, and individuals at different levels organizationally within a given employer (e.g., Executive, Human Resources and Equal Employment Opportunity, front line supervisor or manager). The survey will fill in current gaps in the research literature regarding employer perspectives on the employment of people with disabilities that are critical to meeting ODEP’s mission to develop and influence disability employment policy and promote effective practices.
A recent literature review by ODEP revealed the following weaknesses in the methods utilized in the research:
Definition of employer. The definition varies in the literature, with most articles defining the term to cover the pool of respondents utilized in the specific study.
Policy and action disconnect. Many surveys do not connect the responses provided with the actions undertaken by employers. For example, some surveys ask about company policies but neglect to ask if and how the policies are implemented.
Industry sectors. Little data exist to substantiate a comparison of practices between industries.
High growth industries. Little research has been conducted on companies in rapidly growing industries. There is a high likelihood that an interest in recruiting employees with disabilities may exist in these industries.
Company size. Little research has compared employer perspectives on the employment of people with disabilities based on company size.
ODEP concluded that the research on employer perspectives on employing people with disabilities needs a strategic and scientifically based approach that rigorously collects and aggregates data from multiple types of employers. This survey is designed to fill a needed gap in our knowledge about the practices and organizational challenges that employers face in recruiting, retaining, and advancing persons with disabilities. There have been surveys conducted on employer attitudes, but there are no studies on employer practices and challenges. This survey will also provide needed information on practices and challenges by company size and industry sector. The proposed survey is designed to meet those needs.
Definition of employer. We define the employer as the individuals at different levels organizationally within a given employer we are surveying: Executive, HR, EEO, front line supervisors, and managers.
Organizational leadership level by industry sector. We can also compare leadership levels across high growth companies and industries.
Policy and action disconnect. Questions are designed to ask about company policy and how the policies are implemented.
Company size. We can also compare perspectives according by company size.
Industry sectors. Sampling by industry sector will allow a comparison of practices among industries, including some high grow industries identified by the BLS and the President’s High Growth Job Training Initiative:
Construction
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
Information
Financial activities
Professional and business services
Education and health services
Leisure and hospitality
Other services
State and local government
Manufacturing
A.2 Use of the Information
Results from the proposed survey will provide ODEP with new knowledge on employer perspectives on employing people with disabilities, and the effective policies and practices that influence the employment of people with disabilities. With this information, ODEP can better formulate targeted strategies and policies for increasing the employment of persons with disabilities. While ODEP has conducted focus groups with high level executives, this survey will provide detailed and comprehensive data on employer attitudes and practices regarding hiring, recruitment, and retention for the industries involved. To ODEP’s knowledge, such data is not currently available from any other source.
The survey has been designed to allow comparisons of employer of practices and challenges in recruiting, retaining and advancing persons with disabilities. The following are examples of some of the analyses we plan to conduct.
Companies that actively recruit job applicants who are persons with disabilities (Q13): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Methods used by companies that proactively recruit job applicants (Q13a): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Strategies that would persuade companies to recruit persons with disabilities (Q14) : comparison by company size and industry sector.
Challenges in hiring persons with disabilities (Q15): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Challenges in advancing persons with disabilities (Q17): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Challenges in retaining persons with disabilities (Q18): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Strategies that reduce barriers to hiring persons with disabilities (Q20): comparison by company size and industry sector.
Employer concerns about hiring people with disabilities (Q19): comparison by company size and industry sector. Also comparison by companies that actively recruit persons with disabilities and those that don't (Q13).
Compare companies that proactively recruit persons with disabilities and companies that don't (Q13): what are the differences in the challenges to hiring that they identify (Q15).
For companies that don't actively recruit (Q13), what types of information would persuade them to recruit (Q14), by company size and industry sector.
A.3 Use of Information Technology to Reduce Burden
There is no available technology per se that will limit respondent burden for the business surveys. Through use of electronic media to conduct the surveys is possible, it would not be appropriate with senior level industry executives. The proposed telephone survey will be brief. The survey will be conducted over the telephone, using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI), and many of the questions are closed-ended to further reduce respondent burden. Respondents’ names and telephone numbers will be downloaded into the CATI sample management software module. Survey data are entered directly into the CATI system as the telephone interview is taking place. The use of CATI enables precise sample management and fast turnaround of data.
A.4 Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication and Ease Respondent Burden
Every effort has been made to avoid duplication and reduce respondent burden. This effort does not duplicate information already collected by ODEP, nor does it duplicate information currently being collected. There is no information available elsewhere that can be used to examine and compare employer attitudes and practices in high growth industries regarding opportunities for persons with disabilities. Efforts to identify duplicate sources of information included a review of recent literature and surveys.
The survey will be conducted using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). CATI takes the interviewer to the next correct question, thus reducing the time needed to administer the questionnaire. The proposed questionnaire and contact procedures have been designed in a way that minimizes respondent burden. For instance, responses to many of the questions are closed-ended. The questionnaire will be pre-tested, and further adjustments will be made to the questionnaire, based on the pre-test results.
A.5 Minimizing Burden on Small Entities
The data sources affected by the study covered by this request for review will be private employers. We have designed the sample to minimize the burden on the employers. The survey is administered as a telephone interview that will take approximately 20 minutes.
A.6 Consequences of Less Frequent Data Collection
This data collection will inform ODEP in developing and promoting policies and effective practices to encourage and support employers in recruiting, hiring, retaining and advancing persons with disabilities. Without the information provided by this survey, ODEP will be limited in their ability to develop appropriate supports for potential employers of persons with disabilities. If this information is not collected, ODEP will lack information on the needs and concerns of potential employers of people with disabilities in high growth industries. With this information, ODEP can better formulate targeted strategies and policies for increasing the employment of persons with disabilities, which is critical to ODEP’s mission. The survey scope and burden have been reduced as much as possible without sacrificing the statistical value of the information to be collected.
A.7 Special Circumstances
The data collection effort will be conducted according to the guidelines specified in 5 CFR 1320.5. No special circumstances are known that would cause inconsistency with these guidelines.
A.8 Federal Register Notice and Consultation Outside the Agency
As required by 5 C.F.R. § 1320.8(d), ODEP will publish a notice seeking public comment on the proposed collections of information. Consistent with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the survey instrument used to study employers attitudes toward employing, advancing and retaining persons with disabilities will be made available to interested parties upon request to ODEP staff. The initial notice requesting comments appeared on pages 9779-9780 of the March 5, 2007 edition, Volume 72, Number 42 of the Federal Register. A copy of the notice is attached in Appendix A.
From May through October 2004, ODEP, through the Employer Assistance and Recruiting Network (EARN), conducted focus group research in 13 major metropolitan areas. The 26 groups represented a range of industry sectors and sizes, including for- and not-for-profit organizations, as well as executive-level managers and human resources professionals. The results of the focus groups were used in the development and design of the proposed survey. The focus group research report is located at http://www.dol.gov/odep/categories/research/EARN_report.doc.
ODEP has contracted with CESSI to obtain their views on the availability of data, the frequency of data collection, the content of questionnaires, data elements, and other issues. The survey instrument for this proposed information collection is based on the input of focus group participants.
A.9 Remuneration
Not applicable. No payments or gifts will be provided to respondents.
A.10 Assurances of Confidentiality
Confidentiality is an important part of the study design. In response to this concern, CESSI’s subcontractor, Westat, the firm that will be conducting the telephone surveys, will ensure the confidentiality of all individuals who provide data. A pledge of confidentiality is a major positive incentive for potential respondents to participate in the study. Its absence would be a significant deterrent and could create complications in implementing the study. Westat will take the following precautions to ensure the confidentiality of all data collected:
All Westat staff, including analysts, coders, editors, and keypunchers, will be instructed in the confidentiality requirements of the study and will sign statements affirming their obligation to maintain confidentiality;
Information will be reviewed and data will be cleaned only by Westat staff;
Data files that are delivered will contain no personal identifiers for program participants; and
Analysis and publication of study findings for the participant survey will be in terms of aggregated statistics only.
Appendix C presents the confidentiality agreement all Westat staff must sign. This agreement requires the signer to keep confidential any and all information about individual respondents to which they may gain access. Any Westat employee who violates this agreement is subject to dismissal and to possible civil and criminal penalties.
A.11 Sensitive Information
The telephone survey of businesses does not entail responses to sensitive issues. The study will ask the opinions of the respondents about recruiting and hiring employees with disabilities. The survey interviewers will assure respondents that their answers will not be connected with their names or with the businesses for which they work, and that all results will only be reported in statistical totals.
A.12 Hour Burden of Information Collection to Respondents
The cost to respondents who participate in the pilot study will be in terms of their time only. The pilot of the survey instrument will include follow up questions and probing. Therefore, it will take about 1/2 hour. Based on the valuation of a participant's time at $60 per hour for a senior executive, the respondent burden for each participant will be $30.00 for the pilot study.
The cost to respondents who participate in the study will be in terms of their time only. The survey instrument takes about 1/4 hour. Based on the valuation of a participant's time at $60 per hour for a senior executive, the respondent burden for each participant will be $15.00 for survey. Exhibit A-1 presents the estimated hour and annual cost response burden for respondents.
Exhibit A-1. Estimated Hour and Annual Cost Response Burden |
|||||
Data collection activity |
Number of respondents |
Responses per respondent |
Hours per response |
Annual burden hours |
Annual burden (cost) |
Pilot study |
9 |
1 |
.5 |
4.5 |
$270 |
Survey of senior executives |
3600 |
1 |
.25 |
900 |
$54,000 |
Total |
3609 |
1 |
.75 |
904.5 |
$54,270 |
A.13 Provide an Estimate of the Total Annual Cost Burden to Respondents or Record keepers Resulting From the Collection of Information
Total annual cost burden excluding respondent time is zero (see Exhibit A-1).
A.14 Annual Cost to the Federal Government
The overall cost of this research to the Federal Government is presented in Exhibit A-2.
Exhibit A-2. Overall Cost to the Federal Government |
|
Category |
Costs |
Personnel (plus consultants) |
$223,762 |
Local travel |
$231 |
Telephone (long-distance telephone survey) |
$46,177 |
Other direct |
$35,746 |
Total direct charges (per contract) |
$269,338 |
Total |
$575,254 |
A.15 Program Changes
This is a new collection of information.
A.16 Plans for Publishing
The research team will describe the concerns employers have about the employment of persons with disabilities, and how ODEP’s policies can help employers address those concerns. The study will also provide information on steps employers have taken to recruit and hire persons with disabilities, as well as retain and promote those employees. The survey will inform disability employment policy and practice by comparing perspectives of senior executives in firms of varying size and industry sectors, including some of the fastest growing industries in the United States (see section A.1 for a list of the target industries for the study). The results will inform the development of ODEP’s programs and policies. The timetable for the survey is shown in Exhibit A-3.
Exhibit A-3. Data Collection Timetable |
|
Data collection activity |
End dates |
Pilot study |
1 months after OMB clearance |
Telephone survey of participants |
6 months after OMB clearance |
Data editing, coding and key entry |
8 months after OMB clearance |
Final report |
15 months after OMB clearance |
A.17 Display of Expiration Date of OMB Approval
The Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) is not seeking an exemption from displaying the expiration date of OMB approval.
A.18 Exception for Item 19, “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions” of OMB Form 83-I
ODEP is not requesting any exceptions from OMB Form 83-I.
B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods
B.1 Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods
The target population of this survey includes all employers with at least five employees in 12 industries in the U.S. The firms with fewer than five employees are excluded from the target population.
The sample will be obtained by drawing an equal probability systematic sample of companies within each of the 36 size by industry sector strata. The sample selection will be independent across the strata. Within each stratum, the frame units will preferably be placed in a sort order by Census region and within region by the number of employees in the company. This implicit stratification ensures the geographical dispersion among the sample companies and increases the probability that a range of company sizes within a stratum, are selected.
B.2 Procedures for the Collection of Information
B.2.1 Introduction
The Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) needs data on the employers’ perspectives on the employment of people with disabilities collected with scientifically based methods from various types of employers. ODEP plans to use the data to formulate targeted strategies and policies for increasing the employment of persons with disabilities. Various industry sectors provide opportunities to increase the employment of persons with disabilities. ODEP would like to be able to make comparisons among the industry sectors, including high growth industries. The objective of this survey is to meet these data needs of ODEP to inform the development and promotion of policy and practice.
B.2.2 Data Collection Procedures
This activity entails conducting a 15-minute telephone survey of a representative sample of senior executives representing 12 industries by company size [small (5-14 employees), medium (15-249 employees), and large companies (250 or more employees)]. Westat will conduct interviews with 3,600 respondents. The industries are:
Construction
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
Information
Financial activities
Professional and business services
Education and health services
Leisure and hospitality
Other services [Establishments in this sector are primarily engaged in activities, such as equipment and machinery repairing, promoting or administering religious activities, grantmaking, advocacy, and providing dry cleaning and laundry services, personal care services, death care services, pet care services, photofinishing services, temporary parking services, and dating services.]
State and local government
Manufacturing
B.2.3 Sampling Plan
B.2.3.1 Sample Design
The survey will utilize a stratified random sample design. Larger companies will be oversampled, but all companies will be selected with equal probability within each stratum. This section describes the sample design. It includes a description of the sampling frame, precision requirements and sample size, stratification, and sampling selection.
B.2.3.2 Sampling Frame
The sampling frame for the survey will be the Duns Market Identifiers (DMI) register maintained by Dun & Bradstreet (D&B). DMI is a file produced by D&B, Inc., contains basic company data, executive names and titles, mailing and location addresses, corporate linkages, D-U-N-S numbers, employment and sales data on over 10 million U.S. business establishment locations, including public, private, and government organizations. DMI is the single comprehensive publicly available database to provide coverage of business establishments. An alternative comprehensive database is BusinessUSA, however it does not provide corporate linkages and only a small number of records can be accessed at a time and thus it is not convenient for drawing random samples. Other alternative databases are generally restricted to certain sectors.
DMI’s coverage of the target population is relatively complete. A Westat study, conducted in eight states, found that its coverage of establishments is high1. The study claims that the coverage of establishments, based on the eight states, appears to be near 98 or 99 percent. However, coverage of new establishments can be much lower. The study in eight states found that about one-half of new establishments are included in the list within the first year. The coverage of smaller establishments can also be relatively lower.
The sampling frame records will contain the following fields from DMI: a D-U-N-S number; North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code or Standard Industrial Classification (SIC code); FIPS State code; SMSA code; number of employees at the location; total number of employees for the entire organization; status indicator, i.e., single location, headquarters, or branch; a subsidiary indicator; D-U-N-S numbers of the domestic topmost firm, headquarters, and parent (if a subsidiary); a hierarchy code to identify its location within the corporate structure; and DIAS code.
Employer policies and practices on the employment of people with disabilities may vary among large firms. Some may be highly centralized; others may have separate policies in branches. DMI provides the option of choosing alternative organizational levels. The DMI list includes both headquarters and branch level records. DMI defines a headquarters as a business establishment that has branches or divisions reporting to it, and is financially responsible for those branches or divisions. We will include only the headquarters record for those companies with multiple branches. Therefore, the sampling units will be the single location (a business establishment with no branches or subsidiaries reporting to it) companies and the headquarters of the companies that have multiple branches. The headquarters record will provide the total number of employees for the company, including the employees in the branches. Another corporate family linkage relationship provided by DMI is the subsidiary to parent linkage. A subsidiary is a corporation with more than 50 percent of its capital stock is owned by another corporation and will have a different legal business name from its parent company. The subsidiaries and parent companies will be included as separate sampling units.
B.2.3.3 Precision Requirements and Sample Size
The domains of the population of interest for the survey are based on company size classes within the major industry sectors. The 12 industry sectors and their definitions in terms of 2002 NAICS codes are shown in Table B.1.
The size classes are small, medium, and large. The size classes will be based on the number of employees of the company. A uniform set of size class boundaries can be used for all industry sectors, e.g., small (5-14 employees), medium (15-249 employees), and large companies (250 or more employees). However, size distribution of the companies may vary considerably across the major industry sectors. Consequently, optimal size strata boundaries can differ across the industries substantially. There are a total of 36 (three size classes within 12 sectors) domains of interest.
Table B.1. Definition of Major Industry Sectors by 2002 NAICS Codes |
|
Industry Sector |
2002 NAICS |
Construction |
23: Construction |
Manufacturing |
31-33: Manufacturing |
Wholesale Trade |
42: Wholesale Trade |
Retail Trade |
44-45: Retail Trade |
Transportation and Warehousing
|
48: Transportation |
492: Couriers & Messengers |
|
493: Warehousing & Storage |
|
Information |
51: Information |
Financial Activities
|
52: Finance and Insurance |
53: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing |
|
Professional & Business Services
|
54: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services |
55: Management of Companies and Enterprises |
|
56: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services |
|
Education & Health Services
|
61: Education Services |
62: Health Care and Social Assistance |
|
Leisure & Hospitality
|
71: Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation |
72: Accommodation and Food Services |
|
Other Services |
81: Other Services |
Public Administration |
92: Public Administration |
Table B.2 shows the number of company records in the D&B file by major industry sector and company employee size classes. Single location companies and headquarters of companies with multiple branches were used in the tabulation. That is, a company with a headquarters and multiple branches in different locations was included as a single unit in the tabulations. The number of employees for the headquarters refers to the total number of employees in the company, including the employees in the branches. The number of employees includes full-time and part-time employees as well as the owners/proprietors. The D&B data were available by 4-digit SIC code. We converted the data to NAICS code using a conversion Table available from Census Bureau.
Table B.2. Number of Companies by Major Industry Sector and Company Employees |
||||
Industry Sector |
Number of Employees |
|
||
|
5-14 |
15-249 |
250 or more |
Total |
Construction |
205,164 |
92,595 |
1,517 |
299,276 |
Manufacturing |
147,277 |
109,136 |
6,041 |
262,454 |
Wholesale Trade |
101,424 |
46,145 |
759 |
148,328 |
Retail Trade |
273,233 |
82,451 |
1,133 |
356,817 |
Transportation & Warehousing |
39,882 |
28,225 |
797 |
68,904 |
Information |
44,327 |
24,057 |
1,115 |
69,499 |
Financial Activities |
146,690 |
56,414 |
2,145 |
205,249 |
Professional & Business Services |
277,813 |
113,488 |
3,138 |
394,439 |
Education & Health Services |
259,635 |
128,361 |
6,869 |
394,865 |
Leisure & Hospitality |
169,619 |
127,364 |
1,476 |
298,459 |
Other Services |
210,454 |
50,677 |
435 |
261,566 |
Public Administration |
26.446 |
32,138 |
1,857 |
60,441 |
Total |
1,901,964 |
891,051 |
27,282 |
2,820,297 |
Note: The companies with a missing employee count were distributed proportionately across the size classes of less than 250 employees. About |
||||
1.6 percent of the total number of companies had a missing employee count. |
||||
The sample size in each size class within the major industry sector should be large enough to provide sufficient number of completed interviews to obtain estimates with a reasonable precision. We will select a sample to yield 100 completed interviews in each of the 36 size class by industry sector strata. Therefore, in total, we target to obtain 3,600 completed interviews.
The population
parameters of interest are mainly in the form of proportions. These
include within each company size class and industry sector, the
proportion of companies with employees that have disability, the
proportion of companies that hired any person with disabilities
within the past 12 months, the proportion of companies that
proactively recruit job applicants who are persons with disabilities,
etc. For example, the estimate of the proportion of companies with
employees having disability in size class k within industry
sector h,
will
be obtained as:
where,
Shk is the set of responding companies in company size class k within industry sector h;
whki is the nonresponse adjusted sampling weight attached to responding company i in company size class k within industry sector h (see the weighting section below for the derivation of the sampling weights);
yhki is the indicator of the presence of an employee with disability in company i in company size class k within industry sector h.
A sample size of 100 completed interviews in each of the size by industry stratum should provide an adequate precision level for estimates of percentages in each stratum. The maximum percent error for estimates of percentages obtained from a simple random sample yielding 100 completed interviews will not exceed 10 percent, 95 percent of the time. The percent error is the largest for a 50 percent proportion and decreases as proportion moves further away from the 50 percent / 50 percent split. For example, for an 80 percent / 20 percent split, the error is 8 percent..
There is also interest in comparing the proportions across company size classes and industry sectors. The sample sizes should be large enough to provide more tan 80 percent power to detect reasonable differences in proportions. The power of a test is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis of no difference between two proportions, when the null hypothesis is false and the alternative hypothesis is true. If the power of the test is inadequate, when the null hypothesis of no difference is not rejected, we can not conclude with a reasonable confidence that there is no difference between the proportions because this may be due to the fact that the sample size is too small to detect the difference. A power of 80 percent is generally considered as adequate. Given, a certain power level, larger sample sizes are needed to detect smaller differences. Table B.3, shows the power of a test for the difference between two proportions with a sample size of 100 in each stratum and with a significance level of 0.05. Various magnitudes of proportions are compared. Table B.3 shows that a sample size of 100 can detect, with more than 80 percent power, differences of only about 20 percent or larger. Thus, with the planned sample size of 100 in each stratum, in comparing proportions between company size classes within a given industry sector or between industries within a given size class, differences of only about 20 percent or larger can be detected with adequate power.
-
Table B.3. Power of a Test for Difference in Proportions of Two Domains
Sample size of 100 in each domain for various magnitudes of proportions
Sampling is independent across the domains
Significance Level is 0.05
Proportions (%)
P1
P2
Power
40
60
0.82
40
55
0.58
40
50
0.30
30
50
0.84
30
45
0.60
30
40
0.32
20
40
0.89
20
35
0.67
20
30
0.38
Smaller differences can be detected with adequate power if comparisons are made across industry sectors. Table B.4 shows the total sample sizes and effective sample sizes by industry sectors. It shows that overall sample size is 300 in each industry sector. However, because different sampling rates are used across size classes (larger companies are oversampled), the variances of overall industry sector estimates will be larger compared to using equal rates (assuming population variances are equal across size classes). The effective sample size is the total sample size adjusted to reflect this loss of precision in the estimates from using unequal sampling rates. For example, for the construction sector, the total sample size of 300 will provide estimates with as much precision as a sample of size 177 drawn with equal rates across all three size classes. Using these effective sample sizes, our calculations showed that, differences of about 15 percent or more can be detected with about 80 percent or more power in comparing proportions between most industry sectors. To give some examples, the sample sizes for manufacturing and whole trade are 205 and 177, respectively. Suppose actual proportions are 0.40 for manufacturing and 0.55 for wholesale trade. The test of null hypothesis of no difference in proportions will have a power of 0.84. Comparing industries with smaller effective sample sizes, for example, manufacturing and retail and assuming the same respective proportions, will provide a power of 0.79.
-
Table B.4. Total Sample Size and Effective Sample Size by Industry Sector
Industry Sector
Sample
size
Effective
sample size
Construction
300
177
Manufacturing
300
205
Wholesale Trade
300
177
Retail Trade
300
156
Transportation & Warehousing
300
199
Information
300
190
Financial Activities
300
171
Professional & Business Services
300
173
Education & Health Services
300
186
Leisure & Hospitality
300
198
Other Services
300
146
Public Administration
300
210
Even smaller differences can be detected with adequate power for comparing proportions between the company size classes as aggregated across the industry sectors. Table B.5 shows that total sample size for each company size class is 1,200 but effective sample sizes vary from 917 to 955. The effective sample sizes are smaller because of some variation in sampling rates across industry sectors. Our calculations showed that differences of about 7 percent can be detected with 80 percent or more power. For example, suppose proportions for small and medium size classes are 0.46 and 0.53, respectively. From Table B.5 the effective sample sizes are 922 and 955, respectively. The test of null hypothesis of no difference in proportions will have a power of 0.86. Similarly, the test for comparing small and large size classes with effective sample sizes 922 and 917 and assuming the same respective proportions, will have a power of 0.85.
-
Table B.5. Total Sample Size and Effective Sample Size by Company Size
Company size
Sample
size
Effective
sample size
5-14 employees
1,200
922
15-249 employees
1,200
955
250 or more employees
1,200
917
The overall target response rate for the survey is 40 percent. Therefore, to obtain 3,600 completed interviews, we need to contact 9,000 eligible companies. We expect to find about 15 percent of the companies selected from the DMI frame as ineligible. That is, we expect to find about 8 percent of sampled DMI records as no longer active and additional 7 percent to report less than 5 employees in the interview. We expect the sample loss due to the latter reason, to occur mostly in the smallest employee size class. Thus, we will select a higher number of records from the smallest size class compared to the larger size classes. Since we will be able to sample the headquarters records representing the entire company as a single unit, we expect that the sample size loss due to ineligible duplicates in the sample representing different locations of the same company, to be very small. Overall, we plan to select 10,600 companies from the sampling frame in order to achieve 3,600 completed interviews.
B.2.3.4 Stratification
The sampling strata will be formed by three (small, medium, and large) size classes within each major industry sector. A uniform set of size class boundaries can be used across all the industry sectors. However, if employee size distribution varies largely across the sectors, optimal boundaries will also differ. A good approach is to form size classes so that the sum of the square root of the total number of employees is approximately equal across the size strata within each sector. Under this approach, large companies will have a higher chance of selection but not as much as if the strata have been formed by equalizing the employee totals across the strata. Consequently, there will be less variation in sampling rates across the size classes.
The company records can be stratified further in sample selection by an implicit stratification. This can be achieved through sorting the records by Census region, industry subsector (two and three-digit NAICS codes listed within the major industry sectors in Table 1) and the number of employees in the company within each explicit size by industry stratum and then drawing the sample systematically.
References:
Marker, David A. and Sherm Edwards (1997). “ Quality of the DMI File as a Business Sample Frame.” Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association, 1997, pp. 21-30.
B.2.3.5 Sample Selection Method
The sample will be obtained by drawing an equal probability systematic sample of companies within each of the 36 size by industry sector strata. The 36 sampling strata will be formed by stratifying the companies into three (small, medium, and large) employee-size classes within each major industry sector. The sample selection will be independent across the strata. Within each stratum, the frame units will preferably be placed in a sort order by Census region and within region by the number of employees in the company. This implicit stratification ensures the geographical dispersion among the sample companies and increases the probability that a range of company sizes within a stratum, are selected.
B.2.3.6 Sampling Weights and Variance Estimation
The sampling weights will be attached to every eligible company record with a completed interview (1) to account for differential probabilities of selection and (2) to reduce the potential bias resulting from nonresponse. Each sample company with a completed interview will be assigned a final weight.
Initially, we will assign a base weight to each sample company record as the reciprocal of its probability of its selection.
The base weights will then be adjusted for nonresponse in order to reduce potential biases resulting from not obtaining an interview with every company in the sample. These adjustments will be made by redistributing the weights of nonresponding companies to responding companies with similar propensities for nonresponse. A predictive model for response propensity will be developed to identify subgroups of population with differential response rates. These subgroups will then be used as nonresponse adjustment cells and a separate weight adjustment will be applied in each cell. The potential predictors that can be used in this modeling effort have to be known for both respondents and nonrespondents. These include company employee size classes, industry sector, industry subsectors (by 2- and 3-digit NAICS codes), Census region, MSA/non-MSA status of the company.
If response propensity is independent of survey estimates within nonresponse adjustment cells, then nonresponse-adjusted weights yield unbiased estimates. There are several alternative methods of forming nonresponse adjustment cells to achieve this result. We plan to use Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) software (SPSS, 19932) to guide us in forming the cells. CHAID partitions data into homogenous subsets with respect to response propensity. To accomplish this, it first merges values of the individual predictors, which are statistically homogeneous with respect to the response propensity and maintains all other heterogeneous values. It then selects the most significant predictor (with the smallest p-value) as the best predictor of response propensity and thus forms the first branch in the decision tree. It continues applying the same process within the subgroups (nodes) defined by the "best" predictor chosen in the preceding step. This process continues until no significant predictor is found or a specified (about 20) minimum node size is reached. The procedure is stepwise and creates a hierarchical tree-like structure.
Although nonresponse adjustment can reduce bias, at the same time, it may increase the variance of estimates. Small adjustment cells and/or low response rates (or large nonresponse adjustment factors) may increase the variance and give rise to unstable estimates. In order to prevent an unduly increase in variance and thereby an adverse effect on the mean square error of the estimates, we plan to limit the size of the smallest cell to a minimum and avoid large adjustment factors.
After nonresponse adjustments, the distribution of the adjusted weights will be examined. We may trim a small number of the extremely large weights to prevent large increases in variances of survey estimates using these weights. The trimmed portion of the sampling weight will be distributed to other companies with similar characteristics. The goal of this weight trimming will be to balance any increase in bias due to trimming with a reduction in sampling error to minimize the mean squared error of the estimates.
We explored the feasibility of conducting a special non-response bias analysis by sampling the non-respondents and administering a short survey on their characteristics. This special analysis will require additional contract resources and with the current funding constraints, would require Westat to spend fewer resources on converting non-responses to complete interviews. Therefore we do not think it is feasible to conduct this special analysis under the current funding levels.
Variance Estimation
The estimates of standard errors in this survey can be obtained using a variance estimation software, such as SAS-callable SUDAAN or WesVar. SUDAAN provides variance estimation procedures using both Taylor series linearization method and replication methods. WesVar uses only replication methods. The replication method requires the development of a replication scheme and computation of the replicate weights. We propose to use SAS-callable SUDAAN with the Taylor linearization procedure, which requires less effort to obtain the standard errors of the survey estimates.
This survey uses a single-stage, stratified without replacement design. The finite population correction factors can be input into the SUDAAN procedure to reflect properly the effects of the without replacement sampling on the standard errors. The estimators in this survey are in the form of totals, means, proportions, and general ratios of the weighted estimates. In Taylor linearization approach is appropriate to use with these types of nonlinear estimators, such as ratios.
B.2.3.7 Sample Survey Operations
Westat will contact the selected companies to conduct a 20-minute telephone interview with the senior executive who is most knowledgeable about company policies and practices on recruiting, hiring, retaining and advancing employees with disabilities. This activity will begin after OMB clearance, and once the pilot study is completed. Westat will employ appropriate telephone interviewing methods to insure cooperation of senior executives for this short survey. To obtain 3,600 completed interviews should take approximately eight months from OMB clearance, including the pilot study, instrument revision and programming into CATI, and screening, recruiting and interviewing 3,600 senior executives.
B.2.4 Survey Instrument
The study consists of telephone interviews with senior executives. The interview is structured and contains specific questions that:
Verify company demographics (industry type, size, location) obtained from Dun and Bradstreet (see Section B.2.3);
Assess respondent demographics (title, number of years with company, number of years in position, number of employees supervised);
Assess company practices in recruiting persons with disabilities (number of employees with a disability, recruiting practices, information that would enable recruiting of persons with disabilities);
Address issues related to hiring and retaining employees with disabilities (perceived challenges and concerns in hiring, advancing and retaining employees with disabilities, as well as strategies to overcome these challenges);
Assess recordkeeping on accommodations companies implement for employees with disabilities; and
Determine familiarity with disability employment resources, such as the Job Accommodation network (JAN), the Employer Recruiting and Assistance Network (EARN), and Disability Program Navigators within the One Stop Career Center system.
The questionnaire is in Appendix D.
B.3 Eliciting Cooperation/Maximizing Response Rates
The research team’s extensive experience with business surveys has shown that response rates are maximized when procedures for achieving them are designed into and executed at every stage of a study's implementation. These procedures begin with the plan for development of the sample frame and continue through the development of the questionnaire and data collection. Factors that specifically influence reluctant individuals to participate include the following:
Advance Letter—The research team will develop an introductory letter to send to sampled businesses. The final version of the letter will be on ODEP letterhead and signed by an official at ODEP. The goal of this letter is to introduce the study, explain respondent’s rights, and alert the respondents that an interviewer will be calling. A toll-free number will be included so that respondents could call to verify the legitimacy of the study, to ask questions or to set up an appointment for an interview. The advance letter is in Appendix D.
Contacting the most appropriate respondent—We will send all small and medium-sized businesses the advance letter prior to the interviewer’s call. Large businesses would be called to obtain the name of the most senior knowledgeable respondent. That respondent would then be sent the advance letter. Once the letter has been sent, an interviewer will call to complete the interview. If we cannot speak with that respondent after four attempts, we will then determine the name of a less senior, but equally knowledgeable respondent. We will ask for respondents by title, using the titles currently cited in the questionnaire, and others that may be discovered during the pretest. In a large company, many of the questions on the survey would probably be referred to Human Resources for responses (e.g. how does the company recruit employees with disabilities; are accommodations tracked). Large companies often have human resources employees who are responsible for recruiting employees with disabilities and tracking accommodations made for employees. Information about respondents who are likely to respond or should respond will be collected during the pretest.
Contacting the corporate headquarters—We will contact the business’ corporate headquarters, if applicable, and interview a respondent at the corporate office. If this is not possible, we will then conduct the interview with a senior knowledgeable respondent at one of the company’s locations.
Experienced Executive Interviewers—Westat has a dedicated staff of experienced, executive interviewers whose job it is to conduct interviews with senior level business executives.
Interviewers’ ability to obtain cooperation—Westat uses all experienced interviewers whenever possible. If needed, new interviewers will be hired and trained on telephone interviewing techniques, prior to the project-specific training. In any event, all interviewers are monitored, evaluated, and provided with instant feedback on their performance to eliminate interaction patterns or telephone demeanor that might be detrimental to achieving cooperation. (Newer interviewers are monitored at a higher rate than experienced interviewers.)
Flexibility in scheduling interviews—Being available to speak with people when it is most convenient for them is sometimes overlooked as a factor that can tip the balance in favor of cooperation for an individual who has doubts about participating. Interviewing activities for the survey will be scheduled to coincide with the hours people are most likely to be at work. In the event the respondents need to schedule interviews for a particular time, the CATI system can accommodate their needs.
Well-worded introductory statement--Our telephone interviewing experience has shown that one of the main reasons for nonresponse is that respondents hang up before the interviewer has a chance to explain the study. Immediately reassuring the person answering the telephone that the interviewer is not a salesperson and that the study is sponsored by ODEP will be crucial to the respondent’s decision to listen to the rest of the introduction.
Refusal avoidance and refusal conversion—Perhaps the most significant technique for persuading reluctant individuals to participate is the interviewer training segment that encourages customer participation. Nearly as important is a well-planned and concerted effort to convert each refusal to final cooperation. For each case in which the respondent refuses to participate, the interviewer will complete a Non-Interview Response Form (NIRF). The form captures information about key characteristics of the refusing respondent and the stated reason(s) for refusing to participate. Special interviewer training sessions will be led by highly experienced supervisors for a select group of interviewers. The sessions include participating in the analysis of survey-specific and generic reasons for refusal, preparing answers and statements that are responsive to the objections; effective use of voice and manner on the telephone, and role-playing of different situations. This team of customer cooperation interviewers re-contacts the reluctant respondents. Westat’s conversion program has consistently yielded conversion rates of 25 to 30 percent for combined individual personal and establishment interviews. The percentage conversion rate for establishment interview conversion is a little lower.
Informed Consent--When the respondent is called to be interviewed, the introductory statement the interviewer reads to the respondent will state the voluntary nature of the interview and assure the respondent that all of their responses will be kept as confidential as the law permits.
Quality Control--This survey will be conducted using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) software. CATI is programmed to follow skip patterns. Interviewers are trained to probe to get complete answers to all survey questions. If a respondent does not know how to answer a question, or refuses to answer a particular question, those options are allowed on the questionnaire as well. However, no question can be skipped.
For the survey, Westat will implement procedures to review and edit questionnaire responses. Westat maintains a large in-house data preparation staff experienced in performing tasks for all study types conducted at Westat. During a CATI study, data preparation staff checks the CATI responses for consistency and continuously monitor the data. Interviewer comments and problem sheets are reviewed daily and updates are made as necessary. Frequencies of responses to all data items are reviewed to ensure that appropriate skip patterns are followed by the CATI system. Each item is checked to make sure that the correct number of responses is represented. When a discrepancy is discovered, the problem cases are identified and reviewed.
Frequencies of responses to open-ended and other/specify responses are also run. These responses are reviewed and are either upcoded into existing response categories (for other/specify responses) or categories are developed (for both open-ended and other/specify responses) for analysis.
B.4 Tests of Data Collection Instruments and Procedures
The research team will conduct a pretest of the contact procedures and the questionnaire, by calling 9 or fewer businesses. The contact procedures will be pre-tested to insure that they allow us to reach the correct respondent quickly. During the administration of the questionnaire, if the respondent hesitates when responding, we will ask the respondent to explain the difficulty he or she is having answering the question. We will time the length of administration of the questionnaire and advise OMB if the time varies significantly from the estimated administration time of 20 minutes. We will also ask respondents follow-up questions, such as if they had difficulty understanding certain terms, if any of the questions did not apply to them and why; if there was something we did not ask but should have in order to better understand the employer perspective. Once the pilot interviews are completed, we will revise the questionnaire to reflect: (1) recommended changes to contact procedures to quickly contact the appropriate respondent and (2) recommended changes to the wording on the questionnaire. Changes to the contact procedures and questionnaire should be minor. The contact procedures have been successfully implemented on previous surveys of business executives, and the questionnaire was developed based on input from focus group participants. We do not think we need more than nine interviews to thoroughly test the questions, flow of the questionnaire, and programming for the CATI.
B.5 Use of Statistical Survey Methodology
The use of statistical sampling methods is critical to this study. Westat has developed the sampling plan for this survey as described in Section B.2.3, using standard statistical methods. Westat is responsible for selecting the sample, and carrying out the analyses. Westat has consulted with Huseyin Goksel, a Westat statistician, on developing the sampling plan for the selection of the companies, as well as the survey methodology for the survey.
List of Appendices
Appendix
A Westat Assurance of Confidentiality Agreement
B Survey Instrument
Appendix A
Westat Assurance of Confidentiality Agreement |
WESTAT EMPLOYEE OR CONTRACTOR’S ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY OF SURVEY DATA
Statement of Policy
Westat is firmly committed to the principle that the confidentiality of individual data obtained through Westat surveys must be protected. This principle holds whether or not any specific guarantee of confidentiality was given at time of interview (or self-response), or whether or not there are specific contractual obligations to the client. When guarantees have been given or contractual obligations regarding confidentiality have been entered into, they may impose additional requirements that are to be adhered to strictly.
Procedures for Maintaining Confidentiality
1. All Westat employees and field workers shall sign this assurance of confidentiality. This assurance may be superseded by another assurance for a particular project.
2. Field workers shall keep completely confidential the names of respondents, all information or opinions collected in the course of interviews, and any information about respondents learned incidentally during field work. Field workers shall exercise reasonable caution to prevent access by others to survey data in their possession.
3. Unless specifically instructed otherwise for a particular project, an employee or field worker, upon encountering a respondent or information pertaining to a respondent that s/he knows personally, shall immediately terminate the activity and contact her/his supervisor for instructions.
4. Survey data containing personal identifiers in Westat offices shall be kept in a locked container or a locked room when not being used each working day in routine survey activities. Reasonable caution shall be exercised in limiting access to survey data to only those persons who are working on the specific project and who have been instructed in the applicable confidentiality requirements for that project.
Where survey data have been determined to be particularly sensitive by the Corporate Officer in charge of the project or the President of Westat, such survey data shall be kept in locked containers or in a locked room except when actually being used and attended by a staff member who has signed this pledge.
5. Ordinarily, serial numbers shall be assigned to respondents prior to creating a machine-processible record and identifiers such as name, address, and Social Security number shall not, ordinarily, be a part of the machine record. When identifiers are part of the machine data record, Westat’s Manager of Data Processing shall be responsible for determining adequate confidentiality measures in consultation with the project director. When a separate file is set up containing identifiers or linkage information which could be used to identify data records, this separate file shall be kept locked up when not actually being used each day in routine survey activities.
6. When records with identifiers are to be transmitted to another party, such as for keypunching or key taping, the other party shall be informed of these procedures and shall sign an Assurance of Confidentiality form.
7. Each project director shall be responsible for ensuring that all personnel and contractors involved in handling survey data on a project are instructed in these procedures throughout the period of survey performance. When there are specific contractual obligations to the client regarding confidentiality, the project director shall develop additional procedures to comply with these obligations and shall instruct field staff, clerical staff, consultants, and any other persons who work on the project in these additional procedures. At the end of the period of survey performance, the project director shall arrange for proper storage or disposition of survey data including any particular contractual requirements for storage or disposition. When required to turn over survey data to our clients, we must provide proper safeguards to ensure confidentiality up to the time of delivery.
8. Project directors shall ensure that survey practices adhere to the provisions of the U.S. Privacy Act of 1974 with regard to surveys of individuals for the Federal Government. Project directors must ensure that procedures are established in each survey to inform each respondent of the authority for the survey, the purpose and use of the survey, the voluntary nature of the survey (where applicable) and the effects on the respondents, if any, of not responding.
PLEDGE
I hereby certify that I have carefully read and will cooperate fully with the above procedures. I will keep completely confidential all information arising from surveys concerning individual respondents to which I gain access. I will not discuss, disclose, disseminate, or provide access to survey data and identifiers except as authorized by Westat. In addition, I will comply with any additional procedures established by Westat for a particular contract. I will devote my best efforts to ensure that there is compliance with the required procedures by personnel whom I supervise. I understand that violation of this pledge is sufficient grounds for disciplinary action, including dismissal. I also understand that violation of the privacy rights of individuals through such unauthorized discussion, disclosure, dissemination, or access may make me subject to criminal or civil penalties. I give my personal pledge that I shall abide by this assurance of confidentiality.
Signature
Appendix B
Survey Instrument |
Proposed Advance Letter:
This letter will be on ODEP letterhead.
DATE
Dear _____________
The Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), U.S. Department of Labor, provides policy analysis, technical assistance, development of innovative practices and strategies, and education and outreach to employers, employees and the disability community. ODEP is interested in learning how employers recruit and retain employees with disabilities. By gathering this information from senior executives, ODEP will be better able to develop policies that increase the number of people with disabilities who work.
Your company has been randomly selected to participate in the Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities. Westat is conducting the interviews for the Department of Labor. Within the next few weeks, someone from Westat will call you to complete a short interview. Your cooperation is essential to the success of this effort. Individually identifiable data will be accessible only to authorized project staff at Westat. Individual responses are analyzed only in combination with other responses collected nationwide. The responses will not be linked with your company or with your name.
Privacy: Responses to this data collection will be used only for statistical purposes. The reports prepared for this study will summarize findings across the sample and will not associate responses with a specific firm or individual. We will not provide information that identifies you or your firm to anyone outside the study team, except as required by law.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, ODEP received approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (approval number XXXX-XXXX). The approval covers the sampling of businesses, and the conduct of executive interviews to better inform ODEP’s policies.
You may call Westat at 1-800-XXX-XXXX if you have any questions about the study, or to set an appointment for an interview. You may call me, NAME, at the Department of Labor if you have any questions about this survey. My number is: (202) XXX-XXXX. On behalf of ODEP, I would like to thank you for your assistance in this project.
Sincerely,
Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People with Disabilities
September 2007
IF LARGE COMPANY, FIRST ASK:
SC1. Hello, may I please have the name of your company president? [IF NEEDED: I am calling from Westat, a survey research firm in Rockville, MD. We need to send some information about a survey we are conducting for the U.S. Department of Labor.]
Name _____________________ _______________________
SC2. And would we address a letter to him/her at [ADDRESS ON FILE}?
YES 1
NO 2 [GO TO SC3]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
SC3. May I please have the correct address?
_______________ ___________________________________________
Number Street
________________________
Suite/Office number
__________________________________ _____________ _______________________
City State Zip code
THANKS: Thank-you very much.
THE LETTER WILL BE MAILED. WHEN INTERVIEWER CALLS BACK, INTERVIEW WILL START AT SC4.
SC4. Hello. May I please speak with {NAME OF EXECUTIVE TO WHOM THE LETTER WAS MAILED}?
[My name is {INTERVIEWER’S NAME} and I am calling on behalf of the U. S. Department of Labor. {EXECUTIVE’S NAME} recently received a letter about a study of persons with disabilities.]
AVAILABLE/COMING TO THE PHONE 1 [GO TO SC6]
NOT AVAILABLE 2
AT ANOTHER TELEPHONE NUMBER 3
NO SUCH PERSON/NO LONGER HERE/NEW
RESPONDENT NEEDED 4 [GO TO SC5]
TELEPHONE COMPANY RECORDING 5
ANSWERING MACHINE/VOICE MAIL AM
RETRY DIALING RT
GO TO RESULT GT
SC5. I’d like to speak with someone else who makes decisions on hiring at the overall company level such as your company President or Human Resources Manager. Would you please connect me to such a person?
[ALTERNATE TITLES:
President/Owner
Vice-President, Finance
Vice-President, HUMAN RESOURCES
Vice President
Director
Assistant Director
Manager
Assistant Manager
Supervisor]
[IF NEEDED, USE CTRL/I HELP TEXT FOR PURPOSE OF THE CALL.]
SPEAKING/COMING TO THE PHONE 1 [GO TO SC6]
COLLECT NAME OF BEST RESPONDENT 2
DON’T KNOW BEST RESPONDENT; CALLBACK 3
GO TO RESULT GT
SC6. Hello, my name is [INTERVIEWER NAME], and I am calling from Westat, a research firm in Rockville, MD. We are conducting a survey for the U.S. Department of Labor. We recently sent a letter introducing the study. This is a brief survey of business executives in high growth industries to see what opportunities might be available in these industries for persons with disabilities.
The survey will take about 20 minutes.
This survey is for research purposes only and is not part of an investigation or audit by the Department of Labor. Your cooperation is voluntary. Your responses will not be linked with your company or with your name. First, I would like to ask about your business.
[IF NEEDED: You can skip any question you do not want to answer, and you can stop at anytime.]
[PRESS ENTER TO CONTINUE.]
I. Demographic Information.
1. We show that your business is mostly in the {BUSINESS TYPE} industry group. Is that correct?
(INDTYP)
YES 1
NO 2 [GO TO 1a]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
1a. Mostly what type of business is it? [INTERVIEWER NOTE: CODE 1 RESPONSE. READ CATEGORIES IF NECESSARY.]
(INDTYP01 TO INDTYP22 AND INDTYP91 AND INDTYPOS)
Construction, 1
Wholesale trade, 2
Retail trade, 3
Transportation and warehousing, 4
Information, 5
Financial activities, 6
Professional and business services, 7
Education and health services, 8
Leisure and hospitality, 9
Equipment and machinery repairing, 10
Promoting or ADministering religious
activities, 11
Grantmaking, 12
Advocacy, 13
Drycleaning and laundry services, 14
Personal care services, 15
Death care services, 16
Pet care services, 17
Photofinishing services, 18
Temporary parking services, 19
Dating services, 20
State and local government, or 21
Manufacturing 22
Other 91
(Specify)
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
2. We show you have {NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES}. Is that correct?
(EMPLOY)
[IF NEEDED: Please count all employees, not just full time employees.]
YES 1
NO 2 [GO TO 2a]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
2a. Including your corporate headquarters, subsidiaries, and branches, how many employees does your business have? Would you say…
(EMPLOYA)
[IF NEEDED: Please count all employees, not just full time employees.]
Fewer than 5, 1 [GO TO THANKB]
5 to 14, 2
15 to 249, or 3
250 or more? 4
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
THANKB: Thank-you, but we are only interested in companies with 5 or more employees.
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
Q2 verifies information on file. Q2a corrects 2, if needed. Please preserve original values for EMPLOY and EMPLOYA. Also, then assign EMPLOYB as a combined count of number of companies at each level. If 2 is Yes, 1, the information on file is correct, assign the company size to one of the values in 2a. Combine this information with responses in 2a, so that EMPLOYB is a combined frequency, by size of company.
3. How many employees do you have at your location?
(EMPLOC)
[IF NEEDED: Please count all employees, not just full time employees.]
_____________________ NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AT LOCATION
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
4. We show your business headquarters is in {STATE}. Is that correct?
(STATE)
YES 1
NO 2 [GO TO 4a]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
4a. In what state or U.S. territory is your business headquartered?
(STATE01 TO STATE56)
[IF NEEDED: We want to know where your U.S. headquarters is located.]
-
STATE
STATE
ALABAMA 1
MONTANA 29
ALASKA 2
NEBRASKA 30
AMERICAN SAMOA 3
NEVADA 31
ARKANSAS 4
NEW HAMPSHIRE 32
ARIZONA 5
NEW JERSEY 33
CALIFORNIA 6
NEW MEXICO 34
COLORADO 7
NEW YORK 35
CONNECTICUT 8
NORTH CAROLINA 36
DELAWARE 9
NORTH DAKOTA 37
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (WASHINGTON, DC) 10
NORTHERN MARIANA
ISLANDS 38
FLORIDA 11
OHIO 39
GEORGIA 12
OKALHOMA 40
GUAM 13
OREGON 41
HAWAII 14
PENNSYLVANIA 42
IDAHO 15
PUERTO RICO 43
ILLINOIS 16
RHODE ISLAND 44
INDIANA 17
SOUTH CAROLINA 45
IOWA 18
SOUTH DAKOTA 46
KANSAS 19
TENNESSEE 47
KENTUCKY 20
TEXAS 48
LOUISIANA 21
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 49
MAINE 22
UTAH 50
MARYLAND 23
VERMONT 51
MASSACHUSETTS 24
VIRGINIA 52
MICHIGAN 25
WASHINGTON 53
MINNESOTA 26
WEST VIRGINIA 54
MISSISSIPPI 27
WISCONSIN 55
MISSOURI 28
WYOMING 56
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
Q4 verifies information on file. Q4a corrects 4, if needed. Please preserve original values for STATE and STATE01 TO STATE56. Also, then assign STATHQ as a combined count of number of companies IN EACH STATE. If 4 is Yes, 1, the information on file is correct, assign the STATE to one of the values in 4a. Combine this information with responses in 4a, so that STATEHQ is a combined frequency, by STATE LOCATION of HEADQUARTERS.
5. We show your location is in {STATE}. Is that correct?
(LCLSTAT)
YES 1
NO 2 [GO TO 5a]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
5a. In what state or U.S. territory are you located?
(LCLST01 TO LCLST56)
-
STATE
STATE
ALABAMA 1
MONTANA 29
ALASKA 2
NEBRASKA 30
AMERICAN SAMOA 3
NEVADA 31
ARKANSAS 4
NEW HAMPSHIRE 32
ARIZONA 5
NEW JERSEY 33
CALIFORNIA 6
NEW MEXICO 34
COLORADO 7
NEW YORK 35
CONNECTICUT 8
NORTH CAROLINA 36
DELAWARE 9
NORTH DAKOTA 37
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (WASHINGTON, DC) 10
NORTHERN MARIANA
ISLANDS 38
FLORIDA 11
OHIO 39
GEORGIA 12
OKALHOMA 40
GUAM 13
OREGON 41
HAWAII 14
PENNSYLVANIA 42
IDAHO 15
PUERTO RICO 43
ILLINOIS 16
RHODE ISLAND 44
INDIANA 17
SOUTH CAROLINA 45
IOWA 18
SOUTH DAKOTA 46
KANSAS 19
TENNESSEE 47
KENTUCKY 20
TEXAS 48
LOUISIANA 21
U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 49
MAINE 22
UTAH 50
MARYLAND 23
VERMONT 51
MASSACHUSETTS 24
VIRGINIA 52
MICHIGAN 25
WASHINGTON 53
MINNESOTA 26
WEST VIRGINIA 54
MISSISSIPPI 27
WISCONSIN 55
MISSOURI 28
WYOMING 56
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
Q5 verifies information on file. Q5a corrects 5, if needed. Please preserve original values for LCLSTAT and LCST01 TO LCST56. Also, then assign LCLSTCO as a combined count of number of companies IN EACH STATE. If 5 is Yes, 1, the information on file is correct, assign the STATE to one of the values in 5a. Combine this information with responses in 5a, so that LCLSTCO is a combined frequency, by STATE LOCATION of RESPONDENT.
6. What is your job title?
(TITLE)
President/Owner 1
Vice-President, Finance 2
Vice-President, HUMAN RESOURCES 3
Vice President 4
(specify)
Director 5
Assistant Director 6
Manager 7
Assistant Manager 8
Supervisor 9
Other 91
(specify)
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
7. About how many years have you been working for {COMPANY NAME}?
(YEARSCO)
_____________________ NUMBER
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
8. About how many years have you been the {RESPONSE FROM 6}?
(YRSPOSIT)
_____________________ NUMBER
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
9. How many employees do you supervise?
(SUPERVS)
[IF NEEDED: Please count all employees, not just full time employees.]
_____________________ NUMBER
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
II. Company Practices
10. To your knowledge, do any of your company’s current employees have a physical or mental disability?
(HVEMPDB)
[IF NEEDED: Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, an individual with a disability is defined as a person who (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (2) has a record of such an impairment; or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment.
Yes, 1 [GO TO 11]
I’m not sure, or 2
No, not to my knowledge? 3 [GO TO 12]
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
11. Do you happen to know how many employees in your company have a disability?
(DSHWMNY)
_____________________ NUMBER
WE DON’T TRACK THAT INFORMATION dT
Not sure how many NS
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
12. In the past 12 months has your company hired any persons with disabilities?
(HIREYR)
Yes, 1
No, not to my knowledge, or 2
I’m not sure?
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
13. Does your company actively recruit job applicants who are persons with disabilities?
(ACTRECRT)
YES 1 [GO TO 13a]
NO 2
REFUSED -7 [GO TO 14]
DON’T KNOW -8
13a. How do you proactively recruit job applicants who are persons with disabilities?
(HWRC01 TO HWRC10 AND HWRC91 AND HWRCOS)
[INTERVIEWER NOTE:
CODE ALL THAT APPLY. CTRL/P TO EXIT. Probe: Any other ways?]
Including people with disabilities in diversity
recruitment goals 1
Creating partnerships with disability- related
advocacy organizations 2
Contacting career centers at colleges and
universities when vacancies arise 3
Posting job announcements in disability-
related publications 4
Posting job announcements on disability-
related websites 5
Posting job announcements and/or hosting a
table at disability-related job fairs 6
Establishing summer internship and mentoring
programs targeted at youth with disabilities 7
Posting jobs with Centers for Independent
Living (CILs) 8
Posting jobs with the Department of
Vocational Rehabilitation 9
Posting jobs with the Job Service or Workforce
Employment Center (IF NEEDED: Unemployment
Offices) 10
Other ways 91
(SPECIFY)
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
PROGRAMMER NOTE: IF 13=1, YES, GO TO Q15.
14. Would any of the following types of information persuade you to recruit persons with a disability? What about…
(INFORCA TO INFORCJ AND INFORC91 AND INFORCOS)
|
YES |
NO |
ALREADY HAVE THIS INFORMATION/ ALREADY KNOW THIS |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Information that addresses your concerns about costs? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Information showing how hiring people with disabilities has benefited other companies in your industry? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Information showing how hiring people with disabilities has benefited nationally recognized companies, for example a Fortune 500 company? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Information showing how hiring people with disabilities can benefit your company’s bottom line? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Information showing how hiring people with disabilities can increase your company’s productivity? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Information that is supported by statistics or research? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Information on satisfactory job performance, attendance, and retention of people with disabilities? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Testimonial information of senior executives attesting to the success for their companies? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
i. Testimonial information of human resources managers attesting to the success for their companies? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
j. Testimonial information of line managers attesting to the success for their companies? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
91. Anything else? (Specify_____________)
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
III. Issue Areas
I am now going to describe several factors in hiring people with disabilities that we often hear from employers. How much of a challenge are the following factors to your company in hiring people with disabilities? I would like you to say whether it is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or not a challenge.
(CHLGHRA TO CHLGHRL AND CHLGHR91 AND CHLGHROS)
|
A major challenge |
Somewhat of a challenge |
Not a challenge |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Discomfort or unfamiliarity regarding hiring people with disabilities? Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Lack of knowledge or information about persons with disabilities? Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Attitudes of co-workers? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Attitudes of supervisors? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Attitudes of customers? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Not knowing how much accommodation will cost? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Actual cost of accommodating disability? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Concern about the cost of health care coverage? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
15. (continued)
|
A major challenge |
Somewhat of a challenge |
Not a challenge |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
i. Concern about the cost of workers compensation premiums? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
j. Fear of litigation? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
k. You cannot find qualified persons with disabilities? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
l. The nature of the work is such that it cannot be effectively performed by people with disabilities? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
91. Anything else? (specify______________________)
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
IF L =1, YES, GO TO 16. ELSE, GO TO PROGRAMMER NOTE BEFORE Q17.
16. Can you please describe the nature of the job or jobs in your company which would pose a challenge to a person with a disability?
(NTRJOB)
(COMM)
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
IF 10=1, YES, ASK 17 and 18. Else, Skip to 19.
17. In your opinion, how much of a challenge are the following factors to your company in advancing a person with a disability? How about…
(CHLGAVA TO CHLGAVE AND CHLGAV91 AND CHLGAVOS)
|
A major challenge |
Somewhat of a challenge |
Not a challenge |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Attitudes of co-workers? Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Attitudes of supervisors? Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Attitudes of customers? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Actual cost of accommodating disability? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Lack of advancement potential? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
91 Anything else? (SPECIFY__________________)
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
18. In your opinion, how much of a challenge are the following factors to your company in retaining a person with a disability?
(CHLGRTA TO CHLGRTH AND CHLGRT91 AND CHLGRTOS)
|
A major challenge |
Somewhat of a challenge |
Not a challenge |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Lack of opportunity for advancement? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Attitudes of co-workers? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Attitudes of supervisors? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Attitudes of customers? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Actual cost of accommodating a disability? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Concern about the cost of health care coverage? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Concern about the cost of workers compensation premiums? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Finding a way to return employees to work who have been on disability leave or workers compensation? [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major challenge, somewhat of a challenge or a minor challenge?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
91 Anything else? (SPECIFY__________________) |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
19. Some employers have concerns about hiring people with disabilities. Here are some of the concerns we often hear from employers. For each, please let me know how much of a concern it is for your company.
(CONCRNA TO CONCRNF AND CONCRN91 AND CONCRNOS)
|
A major concern |
Somewhat of a concern |
Not a concern |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Supervisors are not comfortable managing people with disabilities. Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Supervisors are not sure how to evaluate a person with a disability. Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Supervisors are not sure how to take disciplinary action for a person with a disability. [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Workers with disabilities lack the skills and experience to do our jobs. [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. People with disabilities may not be as safe and productive as other workers. [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. It costs more to employ workers with disabilities than those without disabilities due to accommodations, additional management time, or healthcare and insurance costs. [IF NEEDED: Would you say this is a major concern, somewhat of a concern or a minor concern?] |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
91 Anything else? (SPEC IFY________________) |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
20. I will read you a few strategies that some companies have used when hiring persons with disabilities. For each, please tell me if these strategies would be helpful in reducing barriers to hiring persons with disabilities into your company.
(HSTRTGA TO HSTRTGN AND HSTRTG91 AND HSTRTGOS)
|
YES |
NO |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Using a recruiting source that specializes in placing persons with disabilities? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Developing a targeted recruitment program for persons with disabilities? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Short-term on the job assistance with an outside job coach? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Training existing staff? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. On-site consultation or technical assistance? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Mentoring? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Visible top management commitment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Centralized accommodations fund [IF NEEDED: A company-wide fund to provide accommodations for persons with disabilities]? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
i. Disability awareness training? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
j. Disability targeted internship program? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
k. Assistive technology? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
l. Flexible work schedule? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
m. Employer tax credits and incentives? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
n. Reassignment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
91. Anything else? (SPECIFY____________________________)
|
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
IF 10=1, YES, ASK 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25. ELSE, SKIP TO 26.
21. For each of the following, please tell me if these strategies would be helpful in advancing persons with disabilities within your company.
(AVSTRTA TO AVSTRTK AND AVSTRT91 AND AVSTRTOS)
|
YES |
NO |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Short-term on the job assistance with an outside job coach? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Training existing staff? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. On-site consultation or technical assistance? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Mentoring? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Visible top management commitment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Centralized accommodations fund [IF NEEDED: A company-wide fund to provide accommodations for persons with disabilities]? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Disability awareness training? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Disability targeted internship program? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
i. Assistive technology? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
j. Flexible work schedule? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
k. Reassignment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
l. Employer tax credits and incentives? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
91. Anything else? (SPECIFY______________________________)
|
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
22. For each of the following, please tell me if these strategies would be helpful in retaining persons with disabilities within your company.
(RETSTA TO RETSTK AND RETST91 AND RETSTOS)
|
YES |
NO |
REFUSED |
DON’T KNOW |
a. Short-term on the job assistance with an outside job coach? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Training existing staff? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. On-site consultation or technical assistance? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Mentoring? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Visible top management commitment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Centralized accommodations fund [IF NEEDED: A company-wide fund to provide accommodations for persons with disabilities]? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. Disability awareness training? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
h. Disability targeted internship program? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
i. Assistive technology? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
j. Flexible work schedule? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
k. Reassignment? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
l. Employer tax credits and incentives? |
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
91. Anything else? (SPECIFY______________________________)
|
1 |
2 |
-7 |
-8 |
23. Does your company keep data on the accommodations it makes for employees with disabilities for any of the following purposes?
(ACCOMA TO ACCOMF AND ACCOM91 AND ACCOMOS)
|
Yes |
I’m not sure |
No |
RF |
DK |
a. Future accommodations in similar situations? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
b. Tracking accommodation costs? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
c. Dispute resolution/settlement? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
d. Regulatory reporting requirements? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
e. Disability claim coordination? |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
f. Anything else? (SPECIFY______________________________)
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
g. DO NOT KEEP DATA ON ACCOMMODATIONS |
1 |
2 |
3 |
-7 |
-8 |
PROGRAMMER NOTE:
IF 23A THROUG 23F AND 23 - 91 ARE ALL 2, -7 AND/OR -8, AUTOCODE 23G AS 1, YES. ELSE, AUTOCODE 23G, 2, NO.
24. Are you familiar with the services of the Job Accommodation Network? [IF NEEDED: The Job Accommodation network, also known as JAN, “facilitates the employment and retention of workers with disabilities by providing employers, employment providers, people with disabilities, their family members and other interested parties with information on job accommodations.” Their website is http://www.jan.wvu.edu/]
(JANYN)
YES 1 [GO TO 24a]
NO 2
REFUSED -7 [GO TO 25
DON’T KNOW -8
24a. Have you used the services of the Job Accommodation Network?
(JANUSE)
YES 1
NO 2
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
25. Are you familiar with the services of the Employer Assistance and Recruiting Network (EARN)? [IF NEEDED: EARN is a free service that connects employers looking for quality employees with skilled job candidates. Their website is http://www.earnworks.com/]
(EARNYN)
YES 1 [GO TO 25a]
NO 2 [GO TO 26]
REFUSED -7 [GO TO 26]
DON’T KNOW -8
25a. Have you used the services of EARN?
(EARNUSE)
YES 1
NO 2
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
26. One-Stop Career Centers are publicly-operated by State and local agencies and are designed to provide a full range of assistance to job seekers and employers in one location. Established under the Workforce Investment Act, the centers offer training referrals, career counseling, job listings, and similar employment-related services.
26a) Are you aware that your local One-Stop Center offers services to businesses?
YES………………………………………. 1 [GO TO 26b]
No ………………………………………. 2 [GO TO 27]
Never heard of a One-Stop…………… 3 [GO TO 27]
D/K……………………………………… 4 [GO TO 27]
Refused………………………………… 5 [GO TO 27]
26b) In the past 12 months, has your company used any of those business services from the One-Stop Center?
Yes………………………………………. 1 [GO TO 26c]
No………………………………………... 2 [GO TO 27]
D/K……………………………………….. 3 [GO TO 27]
Refused………………………………….. 4 [GO TO 27]
26c) I will now ask you a series of questions about business services that your company may have used with the One-Stop Center.
In the past 12 months, has the One-Stop center provided your company with …..
YES NO
Recruitment, job referral, and candidate screening? 1 2
Job task analysis to formally identify knowledge skills
and abilities for specific jobs? 1 2
Outplacement services for employees? 1 2
Analysis of local business trends? 1 2
Analysis of the local labor pool? 1 2
Disability Program Navigator Staff 1 2
Assistance in recruiting qualified workers? 1 2
Assistance to customize training plans for new hires? 1 2
An offer to train current employees? 1 2
Literacy, ESL or basic skills training for current or
prospective employees? 1 2
Services on to help your company with specific
HR issues, such as high turnover? 1 2
Services on how to create employment opportunities, such as recruitment, retention, and promotion, for
individuals with disabilities? 1 2
Other services? _______________________________ 1 2
Don’t know 1 2
Disability Program Navigators (DPN). In 2002, the Department of Labor's Employment (DOL) and Training Administration (ETA) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) established a new position, the Disability Program Navigator (DPN), located within DOL's One-Stop Career Center. The DPN, or Navigator, guides One-Stop Career Center staff in helping people with disabilities to access and navigate the complex provisions of various programs that impact on their ability to gain and retain employment. In addition, the DPNs: develop linkages and collaborate on an ongoing basis with employers to facilitate the employment of people with disabilities; develop partnerships to achieve integrated services, system change, and expand the capacity of the One-Stop Career Centers to serve customers with disabilities; conduct outreach to agencies/organizations that serve people with disabilities; serve as resources on SSA's work incentives; serve as resources on the federal, state, and local programs that impact on the ability of people with disabilities to enter into and remain in the workforce; and facilitate the transition of in- and out- of school youth to obtain employment and achieve economic self-sufficiency.
27. Those are all the questions I have. Do you have any questions or comments about the survey?
(QXRESP)
YES 1 [GO TO 27a]
NO 2
REFUSED -7 [GO TO 28]
DON’T KNOW -8
27a. What are your questions or comments?
(QXRESPA)
(COMM)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
28. Would you be interested in receiving a report via e-mail on the results of this survey?
Your e-mail address will not be associated with your completed survey.
(EMLRSLTS)
YES 1 [GO TO 28a]
NO 2
REFUSED -7 [GO TO THANK]
DON’T KNOW -8
ON paper:
28a. May I have your email address, please?
______________________________________@________________________________
REFUSED -7
DON’T KNOW -8
THANK: Thank you very much for participating in this very important survey.
1 Marker, David A. and Sherm Edwards (1997). “ Quality of the DMI File as a Business Sample Frame.” Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association, 1997, pp. 21-30.
2SPSS (1993), SPSS for Windows: CHAID, Release 6.0, User’s Guide, Jay Magidson/SPSS Inc., 1993.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | 7420.01: OMB Package. Section A. Introduction |
| Author | MARKOVICH_L |
| Last Modified By | ECN USER |
| File Modified | 2007-10-12 |
| File Created | 2007-09-18 |
© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy