Assessment & Research

An audit of the Irish National Intellectual Disability Database.

Dodd et al. (2010) · Research in developmental disabilities 2010
★ The Verdict

Irish clinicians caught a national database inflating residential need by 28%, so always audit before you expand.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who help counties or states plan residential or day services for adults with ID.
✗ Skip if Clinicians only running direct therapy with no role in service mapping.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Dodd et al. (2010) checked the Irish National Intellectual Disability Database for mistakes. Clinicians visited homes and day centers to compare real support needs with what the computer file said.

They wanted to know if the database could safely guide future spending on group homes and staffing.

02

What they found

Seven out of ten client records were correct. The big surprise: the system overstated how many people needed expensive enhanced residential care.

Wrong entries meant planners might budget for beds that would sit empty.

03

How this fits with other research

de Leeuw et al. (2024) later used the same database to price out-of-area placements. They found costs still swing by up to €119k across regions, proving the uncorrected data is still shaping contracts today.

MacCabe et al. (2004) ran a Dutch national screening and also hit coordination problems. Both papers show large ID registries stumble on the same hurdle: getting every agency to report the same way.

Moss et al. (2009) found Irish services missed most deaf-blind cases. Together with Philip et al., the pattern is clear: if you don’t audit, you both over-count some needs and under-count others.

04

Why it matters

Before you trust any regional or national ID numbers, spot-check a random sample yourself. One afternoon of file-to-face comparisons can stop you from buying beds you don’t need or missing supports you do. Share the corrected data with funders; it protects your future budget and keeps people in the right level of care.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Print five random client files, call each caregiver, and confirm the listed support level still matches real need.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Sample size
250
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

This study describes a national data audit of the National Intellectual Disability Database (NIDD). The NIDD is a national information system for intellectual disability (ID) for Ireland. The purpose of this audit was to assess the overall accuracy of information contained on the NIDD, as well as collecting qualitative information to support the improvement in the quality of data contained on the NIDD. A nationally representative sample was generated from the NIDD. Twenty-five auditors were recruited from senior staff within statutory and voluntary intellectual disability services and trained by the authors. They carried out 250 clinical interviews with individuals with ID, their families and/or paid carers, using structured questionnaires. The data collected were analysed using frequency analyses and compared with the existing NIDD data set to assess accuracy. Qualitative information was also collected. Overall, the results from the audit indicate that almost three quarters (72.2%) of all the data recorded on the NIDD are accurate, with 19.3% inaccurate, and 8.5% of the sought audit data not returned. The audit found that the NIDD significantly overestimated the need for enhanced residential care services. The study highlights the need for clinician and service user involvement in specialist service data collection, in order to both conduct valid research and to best plan for ID service development.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2010 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2009.10.011