Organizational and individual factors associated with breakdown of residential placements for people with intellectual disabilities.
Placement breakdown is more about service quality—training, supervision, and outside support—than about how severe the client’s behavior is.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Fyfe et al. (2007) looked at homes where adults with intellectual disability had to move out.
They asked: what was different about the places that broke down?
The team checked staff training, supervision, team meetings, written plans, and outside help.
What they found
Homes that lost their residents had weaker training, rare supervision, and few team meetings.
They also lacked clear behavior plans and had little contact with outside specialists.
In short, the service fell apart before the placement did.
How this fits with other research
Qian et al. (2015) later showed that stronger staff skill boosts resident engagement, backing the idea that staff quality matters more than client traits.
Higgins et al. (1992) warned that workshop training alone rarely helps once staff are back in the house, so support must happen on the floor, not in a classroom.
Mansell et al. (2003) added a twist: grouping only high-challenge residents in one home lowers staff warmth and teamwork, another setup that invites breakdown.
Together these papers say the same thing in different ways: the system around the client predicts success.
Why it matters
You can’t stop every move, but you can shore up the service. Ask: do my staff get real-time coaching, not just a yearly class? Are behavior plans current and easy to find? Is an outside clinician scheduled to visit this month? Fix those leaks and placements hold.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open the staff schedule and book an on-floor observation plus feedback session this week.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disabilities (IDs) whose behaviour challenges services are at increased risk of placement breakdown. Most previous research has tended to focus on the role of individual characteristics in predicting breakdown. A small number of studies have suggested that service variables may impact on intervention effectiveness and hence placement breakdown. METHOD: This study used a non-experimental group comparison design to investigate potential differences between two groups of residential homes, one of which had experienced placement breakdown, and one of which had successfully maintained placements in the community. RESULTS: More residents in the breakdown group had inappropriate sexual behaviours but there were no other differences. Services in the breakdown group had more limited procedural guidance for staff, weaker training, supervision and team meetings and less external professional support. CONCLUSION: Placement characteristics may be an important determinant of community placement success for people with IDs and challenging behaviour. Those selecting and funding residential placements for such people should attend to the technical competence of the placement (in terms of its use of procedural guidance, training and professional advice) and to the extent of support for staff (in terms of training, supervision and team meetings).
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2007 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2006.00876.x