Search results

Social services for people with disabilities have undergone substantial changes over time, in particular in the past two decades. Whilst lack of affordable and appropriate housing is a barrier to community living for many people with disabilities, it is only one part of the jigsaw. This book traces some of these changes, in particular related to living situation and support available, in a range of different countries and considers the factors that have influenced these changes. This book considers other aspects of what is needed to bring about real change in the lives of all people with disabilities

AbstractThe Czech national policy on social services and health is based on the principal of human rights and empowerment of persons with disabilities. Based on published literature and reports, as well as knowledge and experience from working in the field, this mainly conceptual article summarizes progress over the past two decades in the Czech Republic in moving from an institutional era toward one that values community‐based alternatives. While European and national policy is supportive of community living, and new individualized funding streams have been created, progress in the Czech Republic toward the goal of community living for everyone with a disability has been slow and has met with many barriers. The authors highlight the need to consider issues such as the availability of data related to funding and delivery of services, planning of the transitional period toward community‐based services, accessibility of reports on quality of services (including institutions), and the conflict of interests created by the system of guardianship. The authors conclude that despite economic circumstances that may slow down the process of deinstitutionalization, the direction of change toward community living needs to be sustained.

AbstractThe World Report on Disability identifies employment as an important element of social participation. The Report also points to the need for research that crosses national boundaries to identify and address central areas of concern. However, such efforts are hampered with respect to intellectual disability (ID) by inconsistencies in the population definitions used, the definition of employment or employability, and metrics of employment participation. The authors explore the varied ways in which employment participation rates for people with ID are determined and reported in jurisdictions around the world, and note that with respect to employment metrics, there remains substantial variation in the methods used in data collection and reporting across agencies and countries. They also note that close inspection of methodologies is required in order to interpret data from any official statistical agency (as even when methods and definitions are explicit, the variations in approaches make comparisons difficult). Recommendations for harmonizing disparate definitions and metrics include a systematic analysis of the terminology and methods used in national surveys that would assist in identifying which data are comparable, agreement on a protocol and process for examining employment outcomes in the ID population, and the creation of an international panel on employment and ID charged to identify common terminology and population parameters to be specified in sample selection and description in localized research and studies.

This article draws on the findings of the EU Framework 7 project DISCIT to explore the living situation of people with disabilities a decade after the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in nine European countries representing different welfare state models and different stages in the process of deinstitutionalisation. A review of the research literature, policy and available statistics was combined with interviews with key informants in each country to explore the current living situation, changes over time and the barriers to, and facilitators for change. The article focuses in particular on whether people are experiencing opportunities for social inclusion on an equal basis with others. Although a lack of available data hampered conclusions on living situation, it was clear that there had been some change in terms of policy and funding streams available to support community living. Some countries had moved slightly towards community living, while others reported more people in institutions or the development of bigger services in the community. There was evidence of continued inequality in the living situation and full inclusion of people with disabilities, with those with intellectual disability and psychosocial disabilities being the most affected. In terms of barriers (and consequently facilitators) there were three sources: 1) policy, 2) social care and support systems, and 3) awareness, attitudes and advocacy. The need to involve people with disabilities in policymaking and the need for a co-ordinated approach between all actors in the disability sector was seen as critical for achieving further change.

This article draws on the findings of the EU Framework 7 project DISCIT to explore the living situation of people with disabilities a decade after the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in nine European countries representing different welfare state models and different stages in the process of deinstitutionalisation. A review of the research literature, policy and available statistics was combined with interviews with key informants in each country to explore the current living situation, changes over time and the barriers to, and facilitators for change. The article focuses in particular on whether people are experiencing opportunities for social inclusion on an equal basis with others. Although a lack of available data hampered conclusions on living situation, it was clear that there had been some change in terms of policy and funding streams available to support community living. Some countries had moved slightly towards community living, while others reported more people in institutions or the development of bigger services in the community. There was evidence of continued inequality in the living situation and full inclusion of people with disabilities, with those with intellectual disability and psychosocial disabilities being the most affected. In terms of barriers (and consequently facilitators) there were three sources: 1) policy, 2) social care and support systems, and 3) awareness, attitudes and advocacy. The need to involve people with disabilities in policymaking and the need for a co-ordinated approach between all actors in the disability sector was seen as critical for achieving further change.

This article draws on the findings of the EU Framework 7 project DISCIT to explore the living situation of people with disabilities a decade after the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in nine European countries representing different welfare state models and different stages in the process of deinstitutionalisation. A review of the research literature, policy and available statistics was combined with interviews with key informants in each country to explore the current living situation, changes over time and the barriers to, and facilitators for change. The article focuses in particular on whether people are experiencing opportunities for social inclusion on an equal basis with others. Although a lack of available data hampered conclusions on living situation, it was clear that there had been some change in terms of policy and funding streams available to support community living. Some countries had moved slightly towards community living, while others reported more people in institutions or the development of bigger services in the community. There was evidence of continued inequality in the living situation and full inclusion of people with disabilities, with those with intellectual disability and psychosocial disabilities being the most affected. In terms of barriers (and consequently facilitators) there were three sources: 1) policy, 2) social care and support systems, and 3) awareness, attitudes and advocacy. The need to involve people with disabilities in policymaking and the need for a co-ordinated approach between all actors in the disability sector was seen as critical for achieving further change.

Kvalita veřejných služeb, včetně sociálních služeb je tématem často diskutovaným mezi tvůrci sociálních politik, poskytovateli sociálních služeb a těmi, kteří zastupují uživatele služeb. Cílem této studie bylo zjistit, jak respondenti – zástupci veřejné správy, poskytovatelé sociálních služeb a uživatelé vnímají kvalitu sociálních služeb, se zvláštním zaměřením na to: (1) co hodnotí respondenti jako důležité; (2) jaká je relativní vnímaná důležitost každé domény a jak se tato vnímaná důležitost liší mezi kategoriemi respondentů a (3) jak se tato důležitost liší v závislosti na charakteristikách respondentů. Speciálně navržený dotazník vyplnilo 217 poskytovatelů služeb, 249 zástupců veřejné správy a 205 uživatelů sociálních služeb. Subjektivní kvalita života uživatelů služeb byla všemi třemi kategoriemi respondentů hodnocena jako nejdůležitější ukazatel kvality služeb. Obzvláště důležité pak byly položky, které se týkaly povahy vztahů a interakcí mezi zaměstnanci a uživateli služeb. Existovaly určité rozdíly mezi kategoriemi respondentů a také podle jejich charakteristik. Respondenti veřejné správy, starší uživatelé služeb a poskytovatelé rezidenční péče hodnotili zdravotní péči mnohem důležitěji než ostatní respondenti. V článku jsou diskutovány také některé přístupy k hodnocení kvality. ; Quality of public services including social services is an issue frequently discussed by policy makers, service providers, and by those who represent service users. The aim of this study was to explore how stakeholders perceive quality of social services, with a particular focus on (1) what did participants rate as important; (2) what is the relative importance of each domain and how does that differ across stakeholder groups and (3) does importance vary by participant characteristics. A specially designed questionnaire was completed by 217 service providers, by 249 public administration representatives and 205 service users of residential care and in-home support. The subjective quality of life of service users was rated as the most important indicator of service quality by all three stakeholder groups. Particularly important were items that related to the nature of the relationships and interactions between staff and service users. There were some differences between stakeholder groups and also by respondent characteristics – public administration respondents, older service users and providers of residential care were more likely to rate health care as more important than other respondents. Implications for how quality is measured are discussed.

AbstractOver the course of the last 30 years, inclusive education has emerged as a key aim of education policies around the world. Also in Europe, most countries took efforts to make their education systems more inclusive—which led to growing numbers of children and young persons with disabilities in general education in Europe. The implementation processes of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) fuelled these efforts. However, as some authors have argued, not all students with disabilities seem to have benefited in the same way from these developments—such as children and young persons with intellectual disability (ID). This paper aims to explore this phenomenon in more depth by comparing some measures in relation to the implementation processes of the UNCRPD of seven European countries. Doing so, we analyze trends in placements (mainstream and special schools) of students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in general and of students with intellectual disability specifically. As we show, an increase of students identified as having SEN in mainstream schools can be observed in all countries during the implementation process of the UNCRPD. However, in comparison to this rather broad group of learners, the percentage of students with intellectual disability in mainstream settings did not increase as much. Furthermore, the calculation of the "exclusion rate" revealed that this group of learners remains a key population of special schools. These results need to be understood as effects of specific shortcomings in the implementation of the UNCRPD, as we discuss in a further section. We conclude our paper with recommendations on future research and policies on inclusive education regarding students with intellectual disability.