Factors associated with expressed satisfaction among people with intellectual disability receiving residential supports.
Where adults with ID live matters only for friendships; the real levers are social skills training and high-quality daily support.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team asked adults with intellectual disability about their happiness with where they live.
Some lived in small campus villages. Others lived in regular neighborhood houses.
Everyone answered the same seven questions about home life, friends, staff, and freedom.
What they found
Village residents said they had better friendships.
On the other six topics, both groups felt the same.
A person’s own traits and the quality of daily support predicted happiness more than the building type.
How this fits with other research
Stancliffe et al. (2007) later showed loneliness is higher in larger community homes, backing the idea that social climate matters more than address.
Cashon et al. (2013) built a short scale to track satisfaction over time, giving you a tool to check these feelings in your own setting.
Matson et al. (2013) found rural adults with ID enjoy more daytime activities yet feel fewer close ties, echoing the mixed picture here: place shapes friendships, but not every part of life.
Why it matters
Stop hunting for the perfect housing model. Focus on what you can control: teach social skills, match roommates carefully, and give real choices each day. A simple friendship club or shared meal plan can lift satisfaction as much as any bricks-and-mortar move.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run a 10-minute friendship survey with your clients, then set up one new peer activity for the two lowest-scorers.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The aim of the present study was to identify factors associated with variations in the levels of expressed satisfaction among adults with intellectual disability (ID) receiving residential supports. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 96 people with ID. Forty-five subjects lived in village communities and 51 received community-based residential supports. Ratings were made of the participants' expressed levels of satisfaction in seven domains: (1) their home; (2) daytime activities; (3) social and recreational activities; (4) support from services; (5) friendships and relationships; (6) choices available to them; and (7) risks. The data indicated that: (1) interviewees living in village communities expressed greater satisfaction with friendships and relationships than interviewees living in community-based residential supports; (2) in the other six domains of life satisfaction which were investigated, there were no statistically significant differences between groups; (3) interviewees expressed greater satisfaction with their accommodation and day activities than with friendships, risks and support received; and (4) a wide range of variables relating to the personal characteristics of the interviewees and support received were associated with variations in levels of expressed satisfaction. Variation in the levels of expressed satisfaction was reliably associated with variables relating to the personal characteristics of the interviewees and the nature of the support received.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2001 · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00324.x