Chandler‐LongBeach.

Methods	Allocation: 'randomised' ‐ no further details. Follow up: 12, 24, 36 months. Lost to follow up: 21% at 1 year, 29% at 3 years. Objectivity of rating of outcome: raters independent.
Participants	Inclusion criteria: i. "serious & persistent mental disorder" (DSM‐III‐R); ii. no primary diagnosis of substance abuse; iii. substantial functional impairment due to mental disorder (not defined); iv. eligible for public assistance as a result of functional impairment. Diagnosis: schizophrenia, schizophrenia‐like disorders (55.2%). N=256. Age: ˜30% over 45 years. Sex: 43% women. Race: ˜32% non‐white. History: ever married 47%, ever employed U/K, time since last employment U/K but 82% >1year, previous admissions U/K. Setting: integrated services agency, California, USA.
Interventions	1. Village integrated services agency: i. assertive community treatment; ii. employment program based at central site (possible immediate entry into employment opportunities [cafe, store, catering service, client bank, janitor service]); iii. two staff to develop competitive jobs and support clients (supported employment). Finding employment was key value of program. N=127. 2. Control: usual mental health services i. limited case management; ii. limited amount of other rehabilitative services. N=129.
Outcomes	In competitive employment. In any employment. Monthly earnings. Admitted to hospital. Not participating in program. Costs: total mental health costs. Unable to use ‐ Other clinical outcomes are available but unclear how far they are attributable to Assertive Community Treatment and how far to supported employment (see text for explanation).
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Allocation concealment?	Unclear risk	B ‐ Unclear