Bullinger, 1999). Adults with intellectual disability (ID) require greater support to engage in daily living activities and social relationships, compared to adults without disabilities (Macarthur, 2003; Wilson, Jaques, Johnson, & Brotherton, 2017). Hence, care staff play an important role in services by mediating the quality of interaction and access to equipment, facilities and activities, thereby conditioning clients to either (a) increase engagement in activities and relationships, or (b) recede into passivity and inactivity (Mansell & Beadle-Brown, 2012). Research on adults with intellectual disability in community group homes found that they were disengaged majority of the time, only engaged 12% of the time in social activities and 35% of the time in non-social activities (Mansell, Beadle-Brown, & Bigby, 2013; Qian, Ticha, Larson, Stancliffe, & Wuorio, 2015). Of concern, those with more severe disabilities typically receive less assistance from staff, as low as one minute each hour (Emerson et al., 1999). Reduced staff assistance in these settings may be attributed to limited manpower and supervision, higher work stress from managing severe disabilities and behaviours of concern, and consequently burnout (Gray-Stanley & Muramatsu, 2014).

There is a need to systematically assess vocational competency of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) according to the level of support they require. The present study reports on the development of the Client Profile Checklist (CPC) to assess vocational competency of adults with IDD. The 38 items that were selected from empirical literature and interviews with clinical staff were rated by training officers for 969 18 to 52-year-old trainees with IDD from low, medium, and high support level vocational training tracks. Factor analyses, multivariate analyses, ROC analyses, and reliability analyses were conducted to examine internal consistency, reliability, validity, and factor structure. Factor analyses yielded a conceptually acceptable 5-factor structure with 36 items accounting for 40.1% of the variance and with the internal consistencies of the subscales ranging from .52 to .81 (total items α = .85). The CPC total scores significantly differed across the three support levels. Cutoff scores for each track were also identified. In addition, inter-rater and test-retest reliabilities were high at .80 and .92, respectively. The preliminary results suggest that the CPC may be a useful tool for assessing vocational competency of adults with IDD according to the level of support they require.

Most people with intellectual disabilities in Singapore live with family and are supported by family caregivers. Many caregivers lack the awareness, skills and resources needed for their caregiving role. A caregiver support service designed to build the capability of family caregivers serving children and adults with intellectual disabilities was evaluated after 2 years of operation to ascertain the level of caregiver coping and resilience, perceived impact of strategies for emotional support, and satisfaction with a range of support services and gaps in service. Family caregivers were surveyed regarding satisfaction with services received using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ‐8) and feedback from activities and events. Their coping and resilience were measured with the Coping Competence Questionnaire (CCQ). Qualitative data from caregiver interviews and staff focus groups were analysed for key themes that were triangulated and converged with other findings. Satisfaction, better coping and resilience were associated with specific support services. Key themes emerged around several effective supports and areas of unmet needs across the lifespan. Limitations and areas for improvement were identified to meet a broader range of caregivers. Targeted family support services can enhance the well‐being of caregivers supporting people with intellectual disabilities (ID) across the lifespan. The results inform policymakers and support agencies that support of the family, not just the person with ID, is an important factor and needs to be incorporated at the heart of the design and development of any inclusive community living in Singapore.

Research and training priority setting can help to direct limited resources to areas, which will have maximum benefit in improving the skills and knowledge of support workers to better meet the needs of their clients. Staff from a multi‐site organisation in Singapore that supports individuals with intellectual disability and/or autism completed a questionnaire identifying their research and training practices and priorities. Staff were asked to identify their access to training and research, and what they viewed as priorities in these areas. They also completed a Likert scale questionnaire on training and research priorities identified from previous research. Response rate was 27.8% (n = 82). Analyses found that staff were more likely to rely on training than research to inform their knowledge, with training in understanding and managing behaviours identified as a priority across the organisation. Staff identified interventions and supports for caregivers as a research priority. The consensus with previous research would suggest that there are training needs and research areas, which may inform global priorities for this population.

No abstract