MAKING A CASE FOR EXPANDING SHARED LIVING IN PENNSYLVANIA
Introduction• Shared Living arrangements provide a safe, affordable,
flexible and generally stable home alternative for individuals who need residential supports
• In Pennsylvania, most community residential providers either do not offer it, or underutilize it
• PA Department of Public Welfare released a “Shared Living” request for information in July 2011
• Improve shared living, expand shared living opportunities • IM4Q preliminary analysis shows positive outcomes for
individuals with ID in shared living
History• The 1997 PA Office of Developmental Programs (ODP)
Multi-Year Plan included a recommendation to develop the capacity for independent monitoring in Pennsylvania
• Purpose was to help ensure quality of life, services and supports to children ages 3+, and to adults supported by the ODP services for individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID)
• Linked to national project – National Core Indicators • IM4Q grew from a statewide recognition that individual and
family satisfaction, together with other quality measures, are an essential feature of a quality management system
• Based on principles of Everyday Lives
Methodology• Counties select local IM4Q programs to conduct the interviews.
Criteria includes: independence of the projects from service delivering entities, consumer and family involvement on governing boards, and involvement of individuals receiving supports and families in data collection activities
• Institute on Disabilities trains local IM4Q programs on the interview instrument
• EDE is comprised of the following sections: Pre-survey; Pre-survey addendum; Satisfaction; Dignity, Respect and Rights; Choice and Control; Relationships; Inclusion; Monitor Impressions; Major Concerns; Family Survey.
• Data sent to Institute on Disabilities for analysis and reports. • Local IM4Q Program implements “closing the loop” (follow-up)
activity with the county
Results: Scales
• Scales comparison of people in shared living with people living in relative’s home and people in community living
• In 2012, there were 410 in Shared Living, 1752 in Relative’s Home, and 3010 in Community Homes.
• On five of the seven scales, Shared Living had the highest average score
Results: Satisfaction
0
20
40
60
80
100
89.3 87.885.1
Satisfaction Scale Score by Residence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Shared Living and Relative’s Home were significantly higher than Community Home
Results: Dignity and Respect
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Shared Living and Relative’s Home were significantly higher than Community Home
0
20
40
60
80
100
86.8 87.3
80.8
Dignity Scale Score by Res-idence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
Results: Never Afraid
0
20
40
60
80
100
93.3 92.8 91.3
Never Afraid Scale by Res-idence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Relative’s Home was significantly higher than Community Home
Results: Choice and Control
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Shared Living and Relative’s Home were significantly higher than Community Home
0
20
40
60
80
100
57.354.5
42.4
Choice Scale Score by Res-idence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
Results: Inclusion
0
20
40
60
80
100
48.944.9
41.3
Inclusion Scale Score by Residence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Shared Living was significantly higher than Relative’s Home, which was significantly higher than Community Home
Results: Physical Setting
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Community Home was significantly higher than Shared Living, which was significantly higher than Relative’s Home 0
20
40
60
80
100
97.394.6
98.7
Physical Setting Scale by Residence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
Results: Family Satisfaction
0
20
40
60
80
100
92.8 92.5 90.8
Family Satisfaction Scale by Residence
Shared Living Relative's Home Community Home
• Data from 2012• Scale ranges from 0 to 100. A higher score is better
• Relative’s Home was significantly higher than Community Home
Results: Longitudinal
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
89.3
90.6
87.9
87.3
89
88.6
85.2
85.7
84.8
84.7
85.5
84.8
Longitudinal Look At Satisfaction Scale Scores
All Others Shared Living
Results: Longitudinal• The number of people in Shared
Living varied each year• All Others included all other
residential types• From 2007 through 2012, Shared
Living had an average Satisfaction scale score that was significantly higher than the rest of the people in the Independent Monitoring database in every year
• Satisfaction research demonstrates that individuals with intellectual disabilities generally report higher levels of satisfaction as result of receiving supports and services
Year Number in Shared Living
Number in All Others
2007 327 6142
2008 412 6100
2009 441 6177
2010 367 6254
2011 413 6279
2012 410 9179