A reliability study of measures assessing the impact of deinstitutionalization.
Two scales—Adaptive Development and Consumer Satisfaction—give steady scores for adults with ID after leaving institutions.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team checked if four rating scales give steady scores for adults moving out of institutions.
They gave the same scales twice to the adults with developmental disabilities.
The scales measured adaptive skills, satisfaction, stress, and social support.
What they found
Every scale met the 0.70 reliability cut-off.
The Adaptive Development Scale and Consumer Satisfaction scale scored highest.
You can trust their numbers when you track how clients do after a move.
How this fits with other research
Matson et al. (2004) also found teacher ADHD scales stay steady in kids with ID, but parent scales drift.
Together the papers say: pick the right rater and the scale stays solid.
Wilson et al. (2023) later showed teens with ID can reliably self-report wellbeing.
Their work extends Feldman et al. (1999) by proving self-report is possible, not just staff or parent report.
Why it matters
Use the Adaptive Development Scale or Consumer Satisfaction scale when you evaluate placement changes.
They give stable data, so one high or low score probably means something real.
Track the same adult with the same scale to spot true gains or drops after a move.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add the Consumer Satisfaction scale to your discharge checklist and re-give it at 3 months.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
This study examined the reliability of several scales and indices used to measure outcome variables (independence, integration, productivity, and satisfaction) among people with developmental disabilities. A stratified random sample of 112 people was interviewed twice in a two-week period and included equal numbers of verbal and nonverbal consumers, of parent versus other caregivers, and consumers with diagnosed level of retardation being dichotomized into high and low. In addition, half of the interviews were test-retest and half were interrater. After stratifying on these four variables, the sample was chosen randomly within subgroups from the total database of 3,700 individuals who receive services through the Developmental Disabilities Services Division of the Oklahoma Department of Human Services. Correlation and proportion agreement analyses were performed on the pre- and post-tests and comparisons made on each scale for each stratification to examine variations in reliability. Acceptable correlations and matched agreements of at least 0.70 for all measures were found, with the Adaptive Development Scale having particularly strong correlations. In addition, responses from people with developmental disabilities on items of the Consumer Satisfaction scale were acceptably reliable.
Research in developmental disabilities, 1999 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(99)00020-7