Over the course of the last 100 years, sheltered workshops have developed and changed based on the social attitudes and cultural values of the time periods.  These attitudes and values were then reflected in the legislation of the different time periods.  With the creation of the first sheltered workshop in 1840, the primary disability that was seen as deserving of employment opportunities were people who were blind or visually impaired (Sheltered Workshop Study, 1977).  Through the years the definition of disability changed, and the scope of these definitions were often influenced by the wars.  First, physically handicapped people were added to the disability category, and finally those with intellectual disabilities were added after World War II. (Bates-Harris, 2012; Hoffman, 2013; Scotch, 2001).  The broader scope of disability led to a greater number of people who sought out workshops, which in turn led to a greater prevalence of these facilities.  The deinstitutionalization movement also greatly impacted the growth of sheltered workshops (Sheltered Workshop Study, 1977).

While the original function of the sheltered workshops was to provide a place for rehabilitation, the function evolved to encourage people with disabilities to be productive throughout the day and create products and services that the government could purchase, and now sheltered workshops are used as a means to prepare and transition individuals to competitive employment (Brown & Kessler, 2014; Dague, 2012; Sheltered Workshop Study, 1977).  While various laws were passed with the well-meaning intention to help support employees with disabilities, in actuality legislation such as the FLSA, Wagner-O’Day Act, the DD Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ended up allowing for sub-minimum wages and funding for sheltered workshops, which actually ended up contributing to the prevalence of sheltered workshops rather than the transition into competitive employment (Bates-Harris, 2012; Hoffman, 2013; Migliore et al., 2007; Sheltered Workshop Study, 1977).

In order to continue the movement towards integration into the community and competitive employment for people with disabilities, the government will need to direct funding specifically towards employment support services rather than sheltered workshops (Butterworth et al., 2011; Hoffman, 2013).  Employment agencies, employers, and families will also need to be educated on the many positive aspects of transitioning adults with disabilities to employment within the community, rather than within segregated settings (Dague, 2012; Hoffman, 2013; Migliore et al., 2008).  Current social attitudes suggest a culture of inclusion and equal rights for people of all differences, but the transition to competitive employment within integrated settings is yet to be seen.

A national survey cited in Dague (2012) states that barriers of moving from sheltered workshops to integrated employment included negative attitudes about people with disabilities and their ability to work within a competitive employment setting, funding, regulations, lack of expertise, and a lack of leadership.  As of 2012, 75% of adults with intellectual disabilities worked within sheltered workshops (Butterworth, Hall, Smith, Migliore, & Winsor, 2011; May-Simera, 2018).  The fact that people with disabilities are still directed to work at sheltered workshops reflects that there is still an underlying assumption that certain people are not capable of working within the realm of competitive employment (May-Simera, 2018).  Sheltered workshops are still perceived to offer people with disabilities a safer alternative than competitive employment, with less demands and more structure, while also creating an environment that encourages friendships rather than harsh judgments (Hoffman, 2013; May-Simera, 2018).  Despite a culture of respect and acceptance of people with disabilities, employers still assume that these employees will need excessive supports in the areas of communication, motivation, understanding and following instructions, and possible harassment from co-workers, which deters them from wanting to hire employees with special needs (Hoffman, 2013).

Aside from imbedded values, the largest challenge in eliminating sheltered workshops is that funding is still readily available for these segregated facilities (Butterworth et al., 2011; Hoffman, 2013).  For example, while the Social Security Act allows states to request funding for supported employment services, there are no rules or regulations that these services must be provided within a community setting (Hoffman, 2013).  The way the state and federal funding for services works is currently creating a dual system in which both integrated employment and sheltered workshops are equally funded (Migliore et al., 2007).  Unless funding for sheltered workshops is strictly eliminated, there will continue to be a prevalence of these facility-based services (Hoffman, 2013; May-Simera, 2018; Migliore et al., 2007).

Another challenge is the way sheltered workshops currently operate, as well as the attitudes of the staff members towards people with disabilities (Migliore, Grossi, Mank, & Rogan, 2008).  Migliore et al. (2007) point out that it is convenient and easy to place a person in a sheltered workshop while supporting them as they transition to competitive employment creates more work for staff members.  While many workshops claim to be a tool to prepare individuals for competitive employment, many of these individuals do not end up gaining competitive employment (Hoffman, 2013; May-Simera, 2018).  In order for sheltered workshops to continue to operate, they need to have a certain number of workers and produce services or products that sell, so rather than encouraging the talented workers who might be ready for competitive employment, these workers are often kept at the sheltered workshops in order to help produce more (Hoffman, 2013).

Families also play an important role in the systematic change, yet they are often hesitant to support the change because sheltered workshops are all they have known (Dague, 2012; Migliore et al., 2008).  In addition to the actual work environment, family members often worry about transportation, work hours, disability benefits, and long term well-being and placement security for their disabled family member (Migliore et al., 2008).  While sheltered workshops still exist today, they are being challenged more and more by advocates both with and without disabilities (Dague, 2012).