Is employment working well for people with intellectual disabilities?

In our current economic time the state of employment opportunity for people with intellectual disabilities is not in a good state. According to the United States Department of Labor the statistic is 22% of the population of people with intellectual disabilities being employed in the United States. That is not good and employers, businesses, non-profits, and governments can do better. It is more a matter of better and strengthened colloboration between partnerships, agencies, governments, and businesses. Politicians and businesses can say all that they want to say to try and change the situation but it is our actions that will ultimately determine the course.
In a research article by Grant Revell of Richmond Virginia he stated that there needs to be 10 key indicators for employment to be measured by for people with intellectual disabilities. The 10 indicators are: 1. Meaningful competitive employment in integrated work settings 2. Informed choice and control 3. Level and nature of supports 4. Employment of individuals with truly significant disabilities 5. Amount of hours worked weekly 6. Number of individuals from the program working regularly 7. Well coordinated job retention system 8. Employment outcome monitoring and tracking system 9. Maximizing integration and community participation 10. Employer satisfaction. These are the 10 indicators that Revell has suggested that both supported employment and standard employment programs for people with intellectual disabilities should be measured by for ultimate successful outcomes.
Are we following these indicators as agencies, governments and businesses? Probably not as good as we should be following them because our success rate is only at a meager 22% which is in fact dismal compared to the 79% of individuals without disabilities or intellectual disabilities who are employed. In our current marketplace of services for people with intellectual disabilities we tend to be way too dependent of government grants to solve all of our problems. This is not the answer.
The answer is to become way more creative in our approach to dealing with the situation of employment for people with intellectual disabilities for grant money is finite and if grants run out there is no more money. Alternative approaches and systems need to be applied to our situation such as Michael Linton's LETS model which is the Local Exchange Trading System which uses hours of time as units of money. In a system like LETS money does not run out and is created on the spot and is made between people who need goods and services from each other. The system works by consent of the parties involved. This system is much more popular in Europe but can be adopted to the USA for employment opportunity for people with intellectual disabilities by using hours as units of money and trading them on a database. Clients should not have to be seen as not capable of working due to an illusion of finite money resources for money always exists no matter what the media tells you.