Research Article Exploring Vocational Evaluation Practices following Traumatic Brain Injury Christina Dillahunt-Aspillaga, 1 Tammy Jorgensen Smith, 1 Ardis Hanson, 2 Sarah Ehlke, 3 Mary Stergiou-Kita, 4 Charlotte G. Dixon, 5 and Davina Quichocho 1 1 Department of Rehabilitation and Mental Health Counseling, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B Downs Boulevard, MHC 1632, Tampa, FL 33612-3807, USA 2 College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B Downs Boulevard, MHC 1139, Tampa, FL 33612-3807, USA 3 American Legacy Foundation, 1724 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA 4 Department of Occupational Science and Occupational herapy, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 1V7 5 C.G. Dixon & Associates Inc., 42 S. Ingram Street, Alexandria, VA 22304, USA Correspondence should be addressed to Christina Dillahunt-Aspillaga; cdillahuntas@usf.edu Received 6 June 2015; Revised 5 August 2015; Accepted 18 August 2015 Academic Editor: Juan C. Arango-Lasprilla Copyright © 2015 Christina Dillahunt-Aspillaga et al. his is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background. Individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) face many challenges when attempting to return to work (RTW). Vocational evaluation (VE) is a systematic process that involves assessment and appraisal of an individual’s current work-related characteristics and abilities. Objective. he aims of this study are to (1) examine demographic and employment characteristics of vocational rehabilitation providers (VRPs), (2) identify the speciic evaluation methods that are used in the VE of individuals with TBI, and (3) examine the diferences in assessment method practices based upon evaluator assessment preferences. Methods. his exploratory case study used a forty-six-item online survey which was distributed to VRPs. Results. One hundred and nine VRPs accessed the survey. Of these, 74 completed the survey. A majority of respondents were female (79.7%), Caucasian (71.6%), and holding a master’s degree (74.3%), and more than half (56.8%) were employed as state vocational rehabilitation counselors (VRCs). In addition, over two-thirds (67.6%) were certiied rehabilitation counselors (CRCs). Respondents reported using several speciic tools and assessments during the VE process. Conclusions. Study indings reveal diferences in use of and rationales for speciic assessments amongst VRPs. Understanding VRP assessment practices and use of an evidence-based framework for VE following TBI may inform and improve VE practice. 1. Introduction Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common injury with a unique incidence, prevalence, and consequence [1–4]. By deinition, brain injury is “an insult to the skull, brain, or its covering, resulting from external trauma, which produces an altered state of consciousness or anatomic, motor, sensory, cognitive, or behavioral deicits” [5]. Individuals reporting any level of TBI severity, whether mild, moderate, or severe, have signiicantly higher percentages of activity limitations and lower satisfaction with life [6]. To determine the severity of TBI requires an assessment of patient function and observ- able structural properties of the afected brain [4, 7–9]. Some 3 to 5 million individuals in the United States currently live with the long-term efects of a TBI [4, 10, 11]. In Florida, where this study is located, over 210,000 people have a TBI-related disability and these numbers are expected to rise [12, 13]. TBI may afect any or all aspects of daily living, including the ability to work [2, 4, 14–26]. he national estimates of the costs of medical care, rehabilitation, and loss of productivity for persons with TBI approximate $76.5 billion annually [27– 29]. Unemployment is higher among individuals with TBI, Hindawi Publishing Corporation Behavioural Neurology Volume 2015, Article ID 924027, 11 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/924027