CESP Exam Dumps : Certified Employment Support Professional (CESP)

 The LEAST appropriate way to proceed is to coach her how to quit the job in a professional manner. This would imply that she is not capable of working in that environment and that there are no other options to help her succeed. It would also undermine her self-confidence and career goals. A better approach would be to explore the possible accommodations and supports that could make her job more manageable and enjoyable. You could also visit her office and identify how she can create more order in her workload, such as prioritizing tasks, using a planner, or delegating responsibilities. You could also talk to her support team about ways to cope with her anxiety, such as relaxation techniques, counseling, or medication. References:

• CESP Candidate Handbook, page 13, Domain 4: Workplace and Related Supports, Task 4.1: Identify and implement accommodations and supports to meet the needs of the individual and employer, Knowledge of 4.1.1: Types of accommodations and supports
• CESP Practice Exam, question 2, answer C: The job seeker’s strengths, interests, needs and conditions for employment.

The CESP certification is based on the principles of individualized, integrated, and competitive employment for people with disabilities1. One of the core values of this approach is to promote the self-determination and empowerment of the individuals being supported2. This means that the employment support professionals should respect the preferences, choices, and goals of the individuals, and help them develop the skills and confidence to achieve their desired outcomes2.

The options A, B, and C are examples of reasonable supports that align with these principles. They provide Susan with visual, auditory, or human cues that can help her remember the sequence of her tasks, without interfering with her autonomy or productivity. They also allow her to use the tools or strategies that work best for her learning style and preferences. These supports can be faded over time as Susan becomes more familiar and comfortable with her job3.

The option D, however, is an example of an unreasonable support that violates these principles. It implies that the store manager does not trust Susan to perform her tasks correctly, and that he or she needs to monitor and control her every hour. This can undermine Susan’s self-esteem, motivation, and satisfaction with her job. It can also create a negative or hostile relationship between Susan and her manager, and affect her integration and inclusion in the workplace. Moreover, it can be disruptive and inefficient for both Susan and the manager to have such frequent check-ins, especially if they interfere with their other duties or responsibilities. References:

According to the CESP Candidate Handbook1, one of the core competencies of Domain 1 (Application of Core Values and Principles to Practice) is to “provide information and support to individuals and theirfamilies regarding the impact of employment on benefits”. This involves educating the individual and their family about the various work incentives and programs that can help them retain some or all of their disability benefits while working, such as the earned income exclusion, the student earned income exclusion, the Plan to Achieve Self-Support, the Ticket to Work program, and others. Providing informational literature on disability benefits and work incentives and offering to refer the individual to have a benefits analysis is the best way to dispel the myths about losing SSI due to earned wages, as it will help the individual understand their rights and options, and make informed decisions about their employment goals. Suggesting that the individual can appeal the decision of the Social Security Administration, call them for more information, or hide their work activity are not effective or ethical ways to address the individual’s concerns, as they do not provide accurate or comprehensive information, and may create more confusion or fear for the individual. References: 1: CESP Candidate Handbook, page 4.