Report from the Working Group on Improving Public Policies and Programs Affecting Persons with Mental Retardation and Other Developmental Disabilities. Report from the Working Group on Improving Public Policies and Programs Affecting Persons with Mental Retardation and Other Developmental Disabilities : Table 23

12/01/1988

: Table 23

Re:Developmental change associated with community placement
Title:Evaluation of Adaptive Behavior: Institutional vs. Community Placement and Treatment for the Mentally Retarded
Authors:Michael L. D’Amico, Marta A. Hannah, John A. Milhouse, and Arlene K. Froleich
Published:National Clearinghouse of Rehabilitation Materials, Oklahoma State University
Date:March, 1978
Method:The Camelot Behavioral Checklist was used to compared overall client progress in one institutional and one community based program. The study sought to identify components of each program which produced higher client progress. Thirteen male subjects (Experimental group 1=4; Experimental group 2=2; Control=7) were matched for age, sex, IQ, anomalies (hearing, vision, speech, ambulation), and self help. The Checklist was administered prior to being placed in the community or state institution. They were retested once every 6 months for a year. The first experimental group was moved to a training program and sheltered workshop. The second experimental group stayed on in the institution for 6 mos. and then moved to a group for a year. The 3 x 3 analysis of variance (group x trial) provided significant evidence that both experimental groups (community-based program and later placements) attained greater gains in performance over the control on total as well as 8 of the 10 subscale scores.
Summary of Findings:While all groups performed on a comparable level at baseline, the total effects of the community based program on client progress became evident over time. After participating in the community program and placement, both experimental groups showed higher gains in independent self-help items than the control. Both experimental groups performed better on the physical development subscale. Accessibility of resources, consistent modeling, and program quality were hypothesized as factors responsible for higher performance by experimental groups. The community program, when applied in a natural setting, affected greater change in adaptive behavior when compared to a similar program in an institutional setting.