Service Delivery

Community integration of young adults with mental retardation: a multivariate analysis of adjustment.

Ittenbach et al. (1993) · Research in developmental disabilities 1993
★ The Verdict

For young adults with ID, earned wages, lighter support, ordinary housing, engaging days, and fewer health limits spell better community adjustment.

✓ Read this if BCBAs helping teens or young adults with ID move from school to community life.
✗ Skip if Practitioners who only serve early-intervention or school-age clients.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Antonak et al. (1993) looked at how young adults with intellectual disability were doing after they moved into the community. They grouped people into three levels of adjustment: doing well, getting by, or struggling. Then they ran a stats model to see which everyday factors best told the groups apart. They studied income, support hours, where the person lived, daytime activities, and any medical or behavior limits.

02

What they found

Five variables did the heavy lifting. People with earned wages, less intense support, homes of their own or with family, meaningful day programs, and fewer limiting conditions were usually in the 'doing well' cluster. The model used these five items to sort most participants into the right adjustment group.

03

How this fits with other research

Singh et al. (1991) asked a similar question two years earlier. They compared supervised apartments, group homes, and family homes. Apartments gave the most normal, independent routines while keeping satisfaction high. Antonak et al. (1993) echo that result: independent living and earned income signal better adjustment.

Young (2006) followed adults for years and found the same pattern. Dispersed community houses beat cluster centres on adaptive gains. The 1993 snapshot and the 2006 follow-up line up: scattered, ordinary housing works better than bundled facilities.

English et al. (1995) sound a warning. Even adults who lived 'independently' still had almost no contact with non-disabled neighbors. Antonak et al. (1993) counted living arrangement as a plus, but A et al. remind us that placement alone does not create real social integration. The two studies do not clash; they simply measure different parts of 'adjustment.'

04

Why it matters

When you write a transition plan, keep these five levers in mind: help the client get paid work, shrink paid support to the minimum, pick ordinary housing, secure a valued day activity, and tackle any medical or behavioral limits that could cap growth. Track these five and you track adjustment without waiting for a full quality-of-life battery.

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

Add a line to the transition plan that tracks whether the client has a paycheck, a valued daytime slot, and a lease or family home.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether differences in community adjustment existed for three groups of young adults with mental retardation using data organized on the basis of four empirically validated factors identified in prior research. A descriptive discriminant function analysis was used as a follow-up to a statistically significant multivariate analysis of variance F-ratio. Results obtained from the discriminant analysis indicated that five variables (number of limiting factors, earned income, number of support services, living arrangement, number of daytime activities) contributed substantively to separation of the three group centroids.

Research in developmental disabilities, 1993 · doi:10.1016/0891-4222(93)90022-c