Bias	Authors' judgment	Description
Selection bias	Very likely	No discussion of specific randomization process and selection method other than that the method was not a waitlist design
Performance bias	Very likely	Researchers reported that blinding was not possible due to the nature of the data collection and analysis procedure
Detection bias	Very likely	Researchers reported that blinding was not possible due to the nature of the data collection and analysis procedure
Attrition bias	Likely	Attrition occurred between group assignment and outcome time point. Five participants originally assigned to the control group elected to reapply for randomization after 1 year; four of the five were reassigned to the treatment group
Reporting bias	Unlikely	Reporting complete for work status, supports intensity scale for behavioral and medical supports, demographic information, prior unpaid and paid work experience, and reported use of psychotropic medication
Other bias	Likely	Treatment group participants were located at one site with largely the same staff. Authors noted possible bias as a result of geographic location and staff skill and training