Strategic Service Change: Development of Core Services in Wales, 1983–1995 1

Health &Amp; Social Care in the Community

et al. 2000

Self Cite

Within the staffed housing model relatively little is known about the characteristics of different types of provider agency. Data on size, homeliness and physical integration of settings, organisational culture, working methods, staffing levels and resident characteristics, were collected on a stratified random sample of provision in South-West England and Wales. Provider agencies did not differ significantly on three of the four variables relating to residents' characteristics. Nor did they differ in terms of the homeliness or physical integration of settings. However, there were significant differences between providers on the important variables of working methods and staffing levels. Resident ability correlated with staffing levels and organisational culture, but not with staff working methods. The results and their implications are discussed in the context of other research which has used the same measures.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characteristics of staffed community housing services for people with learning disabilities: a stratified random sample of statutory, voluntary and private agency provision

Perry

Lowe

Health &Amp; Social Care in the Community

et al. 2000

Self Cite

“…Allowing for such a margin suggests that the rate of out-of-family residential placement for adults in England of 1.68/1,000 aged 16 years or over has remained stable. Perry et al [1998] showed that the overall provision of residential supports in Wales, inclusive of people living in hospitals, declined from a rate of 109 places per 100,000 total population in 1983 to 98 in 1995. They also showed that the mean sizes of local authority, private, and voluntary sector residential services in Wales in 1995 were 4.3 (3.1 if the remaining hostels were excluded), 2.8, and 2.8, respectively.…”

Section: Scope and Nature Of Residential Arrangementsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Living circumstances of children and adults with mental retardation or developmental disabilities in the united states, canada, england and wales, and australia

Braddock

Emerson

Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev.

et al. 2001

Self Cite

159

131

The purpose of this article was to collate evidence to describe where people with mental retardation or developmental disabilities live in five developed countries: United States, Canada, England, Wales, and Australia. Family homes are important dwelling places for people with mental retardation. They are the home of the great majority of children with mental retardation and a considerable proportion of adults with mental retardation. The likelihood of placement outside the family home increases with adulthood and progressively as people age. Adults with mental retardation live in a wide variety of settings, with formal residential provision frequently dependent on the arrangements that the authorities responsible for providing service support have chosen to make. There has been a considerable move away from accommodating people in large segregated and geographically isolated institutions in the countries considered. However, the current range of accommodation includes much with a distinctively different character to the homes where other citizens live. Many people still live in larger groups than would be ordinarily found in typical homes and this may necessitate departure from the architectural norm. In all of the countries considered, there has been a recent trend towards small community settings, compatible with typical housing architecture. This appears furthest advanced in the U.S. but is discernible elsewhere. Availability of residential services at a national level varies between 100 and 155 places per 100,000 total population. Regional variation within countries is even greater. In no case is the national availability considered adequate to meet the demand arising from changing need or expectations. MRDD Research Reviews 7:115-121, 2001. (c) 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

“…There is now greater diversity in the range of day services but still a core reliance on day centre provision (e.g. Perry et al 1998 ). Further service development is required if people with intellectual disabilities and particularly those with more severe disabilities are to be given greater opportunities to engage in occupations which are typically pursued by people without disabilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cost‐Effectiveness of Supported Employment for People with Severe Intellectual Disabilities and High Support Needs: a Pilot Study

Shearn

Beyer

Research Intellect Disabil

2000

Self Cite

The costs and outcomes of supporting seven people with severe intellectual disabilities and high support needs in part‐time employment were compared with those of a Special Needs Unit (SNU) of a day centre, both within‐subject and against an equal‐sized comparison group. The income of those employed was described. Direct observation of the employment activities and representative SNU activities were undertaken to assess participant engagement in activity and receipt of assistance, social contact in general and social contact from people other than paid staff. Costs of providing service support were calculated taking account of staff : service user ratios, staff identities and wage rates and service‐administrative and management overheads. Employment was associated with greater receipt of assistance, higher task‐related engagement in activity and more social contact from people other than paid staff. SNU activities were associated with greater receipt of social contact. Supporting people in employment was more expensive than in the SNU. Cost‐effectiveness ratios of producing assistance and engagement in activities were equivalent across the comparative contexts. The SNU was more cost‐effective in producing social involvement; employment in producing social contact from people other than paid staff.