Exploring the social networks of people with intellectual disability who live in Individual Supported Living arrangements—A multiple case study

Research on social networks of people with intellectual disability has mostly focused on comparisons between people living in congregate settings and in the community. Individual Supported Living (ISL) describes arrangements where people live in a home of their choice with the support they require. Individualised forms of housing provide greater opportunity for community connection, however, many people with intellectual disability experience loneliness and exclusion, with family and paid staff as key social network members. Ecological models as well as social capital theory have emerged to examine social relationships of people with intellectual disability. Using Bronfenbrenner’s Process-Person-Context-Time (PPCT) model and social capital theory as a theoretical lens, this study explores how people with intellectual disability and members of their social network describe and experience relationships. Using a multiple case study design underpinned by constructivist epistemology, the study comprised four case studies. Data were collected using an adapted version of the Social Network Guide (Forrester-Jones, 1998; Forrester-Jones & Duplock, 2006), semi-structured interviews, and field notes. Case report data were analysed qualitatively using open and axial coding. Each case yielded rich insight into the four focal participants relationships, from their own perspective as well as members of their social network. Using selective coding, the cross-case analysis identified nine overarching themes that led to the development of a proposed model, entitled Attaining Social Connection Within an Ecological Framework. Aligning key findings with the PPCT model and social capital theory, a multidimensional model traversing individual, interactional and environmental factors was proposed. Findings highlighted that a key factor in attaining social connection was through intentional facilitation from family and other network members, described by the term social brokerage. Findings and recommendations contribute to ongoing research about how people with intellectual disability and their families/supporters can facilitate and maintain meaningful social connection

A transformative framework for deinstitutionalisation

Closure of the remaining institutions where some people with intellectual disabilities live is increasingly urgent following the Australian Government commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the National Disability Strategy, and the full National Disability Insurance Scheme. How can the transformative opportunities that this new policy context opens for people leaving institutional care be realised? This article analyses the rights of people leaving institutions by drawing on the data from an evaluation of the closure of three New South Wales institutions and the related development of four new facilities. The closures aimed to achieve a better quality of life but results were mixed. While participation, growing and learning, health and wellbeing, social relationships, and autonomy improved for some people, results were not consistent between sites and in some cases people were actually worse off than before. Community inclusion was not the focus of the closures and social isolation negatively affected the quality of life of people who were relocated. The implications are that remaining closures must apply a rights-based framework rather than building new facilities to meet legislative rights obligations. This includes: taking a person-centred approach to housing support; using closure as a transformative opportunity for community living; identifying people\u27s choices through informed supported decision-making; applying sophisticated change management with families, staff and unions; and using the resources, expertise and successful closure experiences from the disability community to inform the process and opportunities for housing support. Applying the framework could draw on Australian and international evidence and experience

Closure of Grosvenor, Peat Island and Lachlan Large residential centres –post implementation review.

Ageing, Disability and Home Care (ADHC), Department of Family and Community Services NSW, undertook a Post Implementation Review (PIR) in accordance with the Gateway Review System of the closure of three ADHC Large Residential Centres (LRC): Grosvenor, Peat Island and Lachlan Centres; and the development of new accommodation models at Summer Hill, Hamlyn Terrace (Casuarina Grove), Wadalba (Fig Close) and North Ryde (Norton Road). The aim of the PIR is to ensure that lessons are identified to improve the process of the closure of LRCs and the development of new accommodation services for people with disability. The Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) conducted the review from April to June 2012. The review included: service delivery; sustainability; governance; change management; risk management; affordability and value for money; stakeholder satisfaction; and quality of life. The redevelopment of all three LRCs aimed to achieve and sustain a better quality of life for people with disability. The Quality of Life Study found that people living at all sites, except for Casuarina Grove, experienced increased quality of life. Change in outcomes for participation, growing and learning, health and wellbeing, social relationships and autonomy were however not consistent between sites. For the future, this implies a greater focus on community inclusion