No abstract

No abstract

Behavioral data were collected for 713 residents of a public institution in 1978 and 1980; the same data were collected for 174 residents of community living arrangements (CLAs) in a neighboring urban area in 1979 and 1981. The research question was whether the two groups displayed different rates or patterns of developmental growth. Matching clients by initial adaptive and maladaptive behavior scores, gender, and age, 104 matched pairs were identified. The institu tional sample showed no change over 2 years, while the CLA sample showed significant developmental progress in reduction of maladaptive behavior. Prob lems with matched comparison designs are discussed. It is concluded that, despite its flaws, this design is the best presently feasible to address the question of client development in the two settings.Studies of deinstitutionalization are designed to answer the question of whether clients are "better off in small, community-based settings after leaving large, segregated institutions. This question is receiving in tense scrutiny as part of a longitudinal study of courtordered deinstitutionalization in Pennsylvania (the Pennhurst Longitudinal Study). The meaning of "better off must be seen to include developmental growth (in creased adaptive behavior and reduction of maladap tive behavior), changes in health, safety, family satisfaction, client satisfaction, amount of appropriate services delivered, and community reaction. The longitudinal study, to which this report is related, ad dresses each of these elements. This report compares the developmental growth of noninstitutionalized clients and comparable institutionalized clients. IIn their review of research on community residen tial alternatives, Heal, Sigelman, and Switzky (1978) concluded that most studies were one-shot, more longitudinal work was needed, and more powerful ex perimental and analytical designs were essential. The empirical information available to compare the quali ty and utility of institutional and community options was perceived to be poor. Heal et al. did, however, note that the most recent studies tended to support the notion of low cost and high effectiveness in community-based, culturally normative residential settings.

Article Descriptorsdeinstitutionalization; cost-effectiveness; community residen tial services; matched comparison; Pennhurst.Seventy people with mental retardation who had moved from a large state institution to small community living arrangements were matched with 70 people who remained at the same institution. They were matched by sex, level of retardation, years institutionalized, selfcare skills, age, and IQ. Developmental growth, opera tionally defined as adaptive behavior change using a research version of the AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale, was measured for all people; only those people who had been deinstitutionalized demonstrated signifi cant growth. They also received more services. Subse quently, telephone surveys and other procedures were used to identify the inclusive public costs associated with the two groups. Upon comparison, the deinstitu tionalized group required less public money than the institutionalized group, although the financial burden shifted substantially from federal sources to state (and local) funding sources when people moved from the in stitution to community-based facilities. Correlates of costs in the community were explored in a preliminary way.

This article concerns the issues surrounding discharge of mentally retarded clients from a short-term, intensive residential service setting. The Temple University Woodhaven Center is designed as a two-year setting for about 270 clients. They require intensive assistance in acquiring behaviors necessary for independent functioning and in learning appropriate social behavior, so that they can adapt to and thrive in a less restrictive, more integrated setting. Woodhaven, however, serves clients at all levels of retardation. The question arises: How is it decided who is to be discharged and when? Upon entry to Woodhaven, a contract is written with the family and client, specifying what behavioral changes are expected as preconditions for discharge. In this approach, a client should be discharged upon attainment of contract goals. A second approach uses adaptive behavior skills as a criterion of progress, and attempts to determine the level of skills displayed by other, similar clients who are already living in the community. This second, criterion-referenced approach is important not only for discharge decisions from one facility, but for broad service system planning as well. The results of the present study supported the notion of a two-year intensive residential program.