The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (October 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
A group home is a private residence model of medical care for those with complex health needs. Traditionally, the model has been used for children or young people who cannot live with their families, people with chronic disabilities who may be adults or seniors, or people with dementia and related aged illnesses. Typically, there are no more than six residents, and there is at least one trained caregiver there 24 hours a day. In some early "model programs", a house manager, night manager, weekend activity coordinator, and four part-time skill teachers were reported. Originally, the term group home referred to homes of 8 to 16 individuals, which was a state-mandated size during deinstitutionalization. Residential nursing facilities, also included in this article, may be as large in 2015 as 100 individuals, which is no longer the case in field such as intellectual and developmental disabilities. Depending on the severity of the condition requiring one to need to live in a group home, some clients are able to attend day programs and most clients are able to live normal lifestyles.
The group homes highlighted in news articles in the late 1970s and 1980s, and by the late 2000s, have been cited internationally as a symbol or emblem of the community movement. Group homes were opened in local communities, often with site selection hearings, by state government and non-profit organizations including the international L'Arche, the local chapters of the Arc of the United States (then Association for Children), United Cerebral Palsy local agencies, agencies belonging to state associations such as ACLAIMH (Association of Community Living Administrators in Mental Health), and NYSACRA (New York State Association of Community Residence Administrators) in New York, and new, non-profit organizations in the field of mental health. Group homes are one category in a broader array, spectrum, continuum, or services systems plan for residential community services or Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS).
Another context in which the expression “group home” is used is referring to residential child care communities and similar organizations, providing residential services as part of the foster care system. There is a considerable variety of different models, sizes and kinds of organizations caring for children and youth who cannot stay with their birth families.
- 1 Types and typologies
- 1.1 Residents and services
- 1.2 Residential treatment facilities
- 1.3 Community resources and neighborhoods
- 1.4 Halfway houses and intermediate care facilities
- 1.5 Foster care and family support for children
- 1.6 Supportive community options for adults with disabilities
- 1.7 Group options for seniors with disabilities
- 2 Civil rights
- 3 Education and training
- 4 Cost of residential services
- 5 See also
- 6 References
Types and typologies
A group home in a local community is what the government and universities term a "small group home." Group homes always have trained personnel, and administration located both for the home and outside the home at office locations. Larger homes often are termed residential facilities, as are campuses with homes located throughout a campus structure.
K. C. Lakin of the University of Minnesota, a deinstitutionalization researcher, has indicated that a taxonomy of residential facilities for individuals with mental retardation includes program model, size and operator, and facilities also then vary by disability and age, among other primary characteristics. Prior residential facility classifications were described by Scheerenberger until the modern day classification by David Braddock on a state-by-state basis which includes individuals in residential settings of six or fewer, one categorical group. In 2014, typologies of residential services in intellectual disabilities include new categories of supported living, personal assistance services, individual and family support, and supported employment.
Residents and services
Residents of group homes usually have a disability, such as autism, intellectual disability, chronic or long-term mental/psychiatric disorder, or physical or even multiple disabilities because those are the non-profit and state-regional organizations which began and operated the homes. Some group homes were funded as transitional homes to prepare for independent living (in an apartment or return to family or marriage and employment), and others were viewed as permanent community homes. Society may prevent people with significant needs from living in local communities with social acceptance key to community development. The residents sometimes need continual or supported assistance in order to complete daily tasks, such as taking medication or bathing, making dinners, having conversations, making appointments, and getting to work or a day service.
Group homes were revolutionary in that they offered individuals life opportunities to learn to cook and prepare meals (e.g., individuals with severe and even "profound" disabilities), budget their personal allowance, select photos for their room or album, meet neighbors and "carry out civic duties," go grocery shopping, eat in restaurants, make emergency calls or inquiries, and exercise regularly.
Some residents may also have behavioral problems that require a better daily routine, medical assessment for possible health care needs (e.g., pituitary problem, medication adjustment), environmental changes (e.g., different roommates), mental health counseling, specialist or physician consultation, or supervision; government may require a finding of involuntary care (i.e. dangerous to themselves or others) which is a hotly contested and disputed arena. Individuals who move from psychiatric hospitals (and intellectual disability institutions) also may need medications reduced, with psychiatric symptoms often only moderately addressed ("modest efficacy") in this manner with known side effects of long-term use. The community living movement has been very successful in the US and other countries, and is supported in 2015 by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN, 2006).
Prior to the 1970s this function was served by institutions, asylums, poorhouses, and orphanages until long-term services and supports, including group homes were developed in the US. The primary frameworks in the US undergirding group homes are often termed social and functional competency-based (e.g., community participation, social role valorization, social and community acceptance, self-determination, functional home and community skills) and another, positive behavioral supports (which may be considered overly structured for homes and home life). Positive behavioral supports were developed, in part, to assist with "management problems" of the residential facilities. Group home residents may be found in workplaces, day services, parks and recreation programs, schools, shopping centers, travel locations, and with family, neighbors, community workers, coworkers, schoolmates, and friends.
In addition, new laws required that schools serve children with what was often known as "special needs" or "exceptional children" adapting school and afterschool programs to meet the needs of the new population groups. Douglas Biklen in his award-winning "Regular Lives" highlighted 3 schools in Syracuse, New York integrating the severely disabled in conjunction with his new book, Achieving the Complete School: Strategies for Effective Mainstreaming.
Residential treatment facilities
People who live in a group home offering support services may be developmentally disabled, recovering from alcohol or drug addiction (e.g., who may have attended a youth drug court hosted by the judicial system), abused or neglected youths, youths with behavioral or emotional problems, and/or youths with criminal records (e.g., a person in need of supervision). Group homes or group facilities may also provide residential treatment for youth for a time-limited period, and then involve return of the youth to the family environment. Similarly, drug, addictions and alcohol programs may be time-limited, and involve residential treatment (e.g., Afrocentric model for 24 women and children, as part of Boston Consortium of Services).
Residential treatment for children with mental health needs
Residential treatment centers and other organized mental health care for children with emotional needs, among our highest health and human service efforts, was reported at 440 organizations nationally in 1988, representing 9% of mental health organizations. Residential treatment centers were considered largely inappropriate for many of the children who needed better community support services. Restructuring of these systems was proposed to promote better prevention and family support for children in mental health systems  similar to international initiatives in "individualized family support program". Residential treatment is one part of an array of community services which include therapeutic foster care, family support, case management, crisis-emergency services, outpatient and day services, and home-based services. During this period, residential treatment was also compared to supported housing, also called supportive housing for its role in comprehensive service system developments, though often for adults who may need or desire services.
Community resources and neighborhoods
Group homes have a good community image, and were developed in the intellectual disability and mental health fields as a desirable middle class option located in good neighborhoods after a faulty start in poorer neighborhoods in the US. Group homes were often built in accordance with principle of normalization (people with disabilities), to blend into neighborhoods, to have access to shopping, banks, and transportation, and sometimes, universal access and design. Group homes may be part of residential services "models" offered by a service provider together with apartment programs, and other types of "followalong" services. Yet, in 2015, the homes and personnel continue to meet the challenges of a changing multicultural society, and changing and norms in areas such as gender expectations.
Halfway houses and intermediate care facilities
A group home differs from a halfway house, the latter which is one of the most common terms describing community living opportunities in mental health in the 1970s' medical and psychiatric literatures. Specialized halfway houses, as half was between the institution and a regular home, may serve individuals with addictions or who may now be convicted of crimes, though very uncommon in the 1970s. Residents are usually encouraged or required to take an active role in the maintenance of the household, such as performing chores or helping to manage a budget. In 1984, New York's state office in intellectual and developmental disabilities described its service provision in 338 group homes serving 3,249 individuals. Some of these homes were certified as intermediate care facilities (ICF-MRs) and must respond to stricter facility-based standards.
Residents may have their own room or share rooms, and share facilities such as laundry, bathroom, kitchen, and common living areas. The opening of group homes in neighborhoods is occasionally opposed by residents who fear that it will lead to a rise in crime and/or a drop in property values. However, repeated reviews since the 1970s indicate such views are unfounded, and the homes contribute to the neighborhoods. In the late 1970s, local hearings were conducted in states such as New York, and parents of children with disabilities (e.g., Josephine Scro in the Syracuse Post Standard on June 7, 1979), research experts, agency directors (e.g., Guy Caruso of the Onondaga County Arc, now at Temple University) and community-disability planners (late Bernice Schultz, county planner) spoke with community members to respond to their inquiries. The late Josephine Scro later became a director of a new family support agency in Syracuse, New York, to assist other families with children with disabilities with family supports in their own homes and local communities, too.
Foster care and family support for children
A group home can also refer to family homes in which children and youth of the foster care system are placed, sometimes until foster families are found for them, sometimes for long-term care. Homes which are termed group foster care operate under other standards than those termed group homes, including different management systems and departments.
Unrelated children or sibling groups live in a home-like setting with either a set of house parents or a rotating staff of trained caregivers. Specialized therapeutic or treatment group homes are available to meet the needs of children with emotional, intellectual, physical, medical and/or behavioral difficulties.
Group homes for children provide an alternative to traditional foster care, though family support to the birth, adoptive, and foster families are often first recommended. Several sources state that, in comparison to other placement alternatives, this form of care is the most restrictive for youth in the foster care system. The term group home is often confused with lock-down treatment centers, which are required to have eyes-on every so often due to behavioral and mental challenges of the children and youth they serve. There are also less restrictive forms of group homes, which often use the house parent model. Those organizations are due to their visual comparability to several foster families within a certain area as well as their connectedness to each other, the community and internally best described as residential child care communities.
Group homes and foster homes have been compared and studied in national samples. Group homes were studied as part of a national sample of community living for individuals with severe disabilities, and small group homes 6 or under were among the recommended options, often for adults.
Supportive community options for adults with disabilities
Newer options of group living were often termed supported living, supported housing, individual and family supports, or early on, "individualized supportive living arrangements" (e.g., apartment programs). These developments often followed analyses of homes as homes, ordinary housing and support services, versus group treatment or facilities, an important critique during the 1980s and 1990s reform period. Independent living continued to be a primary framework representing another emblem of community living more often associated with personal assistance and live-in attendants, home health services, and the now termed allied health services of physical and occupational therapy, speech, cognitive therapy, and psychological counseling. However, leading psychiatric survivors examined independent living in the context of supportive housing and necessary support services which did not need to be congregated in housing.
Group options for seniors with disabilities
Perhaps the largest group of group homes (now termed community residential services or residential care by other managements) fall under the heading of residential care homes for seniors, or both seniors and individuals with disabilities. Residential care categories include over 43 separate regulated categories by state governments and now have the new assisted living growing in the US. Group facilities (e.g., funded as large as 100 individuals in a nursing facility or on old-style campus of over 12 wards on the outskirts of cities) or homes for seniors (e.g., room and board) are designed for seniors who cannot live on their own due to physical or mental disabilities. Group facilities, which may involve over half of the allotted beds or more (80%) funded by Medicaid, might also be found under Residential Care Home, Residential Care Facility for the Elderly, or Assisted Living Facility. Alternative community options for these seniors are home health care, hospice care, specialized care (e.g., Alzheimer's), day care at senior centers, meals on wheels, transportation drivers, and other aging and disability options.
In most countries, people can still vote in election and attend higher education while in a group home. Internet usage in group homes, however, may be severely limited. Trips to public libraries may vary depending on the distance from the group home to the library. While 93% of the Canadian population has easy access to a public library, it is uncertain about the percentage of Canadian group home residents who actually have unrestricted access to a public library in lieu of watching television.
Employment and the Americans with Disabilities Act
Employment opportunities, where available, are encouraged for group home residents, depending on the home, operator, and characteristics of the residents. Since the 1970s, people with cognitive or mental health disabilities have been involved in community employment of all kinds and also have developed freestanding affirmative industries and supported employment services in conjunction with the government. These rights are protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, now revised in 2008  Human rights laws, still operational in states, govern employment applications for employment, and the employer is restricted from asking pre-employment questions on criminal arrests or discriminating on this basis (See, Human Rights Laws of the state of New York). However, unbeknownst to many communities and organizations, management rights, instead of human rights, have been inserted in contracts in the US.
Mental health and civil rights
In the US it has been the position of state mental health commissioners that many people who are living independently should be placed in intensive treatment, as described in a mid-1980s article in the Community Mental Health Journal. The authors held that only 12 of 3,068 individuals should be living independently (p. 199) based on their model predictions. In contrast, the continuum model has been critiqued as restrictive of rights, facility-based, and restrictive of community participation  resulting in a US Supreme Court decision recognizing the most integrated setting (Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities, 2012).
Increasingly, concern has been voiced over the rise in community treatment orders, medical homes, invasive supervision in homes, in addition to decades of outcry over involuntary procedures in psychiatry in the US and restrictions on human rights. In this field, no viable recourse exists for reversing actions by personnel, including professional and medical malpractice, and the most successful programs are viewed as those that result in high compliance. High medication usage is required, often against the law, and the situation worsens during any police-enforced confinement. Group homes in the non-profit sector are often operated by other than the providers involved in state or private, for-profit involuntary care.
Nursing facility industry
The nursing facility industry holds the position, often with its affiliated hospitals, that it decides on involuntary treatment of elders, which involves issues such as visitations. Nursing homes have had a very long history of reviews and complaints including to the federal level of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in the US and have been the subject of major reform efforts. Today, a Red Cross ombudsman may be available in the homes, special needs units may be available to assist in areas such as bathing and eating, and in some cities, short term rehabilitation is provided for seniors at those sites instead of at community locations. Nursing facilities, unlike the small size standard of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for homes for individuals with intellectual disabilities, may have over 100 "institutional clients" on site and is reporting 2–3% restraint use.
Education and training
Group home personnel are considered in 2015 to be Direct Support Professionals  though paramount in this approach are maintaining a home atmosphere, routines, and community life. An abundance of literature in the 1980s and 1990s described the training needs of personnel, and today new expectations continue to occur as the homes become increasingly health care financed and more self-direction options become available.
Cultural and professional helping skills
Foundational in all helping professions are what are called "critical skill domains," which are congruent with a community support approach (e.g., values clarification, general fluency and flexibility of thought, perception and response, competence in academic content, verbal communications) (Cole & Lacefield, 1978). In addition, with the multicultural workforce, cultural awareness, even skills like using chopsticks, are desired in the adaptive skill domains  and comparisons between fast food and sit down restaurants.
Community volunteers and participation
By the 1990s, greater emphasis was placed on community participation and belonging, in addition to welcoming support of the community and community members. In fact, several national research centers in the US were funded, in part, on the basis of community research studies in community participation 
Special population groups
Education also occurs for special population groups or particular issues or needs; an example are the challenges gay men face in living with chronic illness  including HIV-AIDS which may be addressed in supported housing options. Attention is also paid to developing residential services which meet the preferences of persons with serious mental illness and their families.
Independent living and brain/head injury services
Education and training in independent living from long-term care institutions (e.g., acute care facilities, long-term rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing or intermediate care facilities, community re-entry facilities) often involved changing from forced dependency to controlling and deciding one's own destiny called self-determination. Life skills ranged from health and hygiene, parenting/child care, home maintenance, money management, activities of daily living, community awareness and mobility, legal awareness, social/interpersonal skills, and family involvement (Condeluci, Cooperman, & Self, 1987). These services may be called post-acute services, and involve other personnel models, such as life coaches (Jones, Patrick, Evans, & Wuff, 1991). Independent living training has also proved effective in addressing the needs and expectations of individuals who have sensory impairments (e.g., hearing or blindness).
Cost of residential services
Residential services costs have been studied in depth in areas that relate to group homes, family care homes or community residential services, especially on deinstitutionalization, Medicaid home and community-based waiver development, and community development. Residential treatment, often provided in larger facilities, may be higher in reimbursement rates to the provider so treatment billings will be found for higher-cost professional services (e.g., behavioral health). Surprisingly, except for very small sizes, the larger, medicalized facilities bill the highest costs per individual (e.g., intermediate care facilities over 16 in the state of New York).
Individual and family costs of services
In relationship to the individual or family, residential services are expensive for low or middle-class families, and federal, state and local government often contribute to these costs. Medicaid-funded options may require use of assets, and Social Security Disability or Social Security are also part of payment plans. New options called family-directed and user-directed involve transfer of funds to homes and families, and continue to be in process in states. Early organizations provided information on their management and financing to help local communities replicate or begin their own homes and programs.
Residential care, assisted living, supported housing
Residential care homes, run by the government or by the for-profit and non-profit industries, need not be low cost and/or low quality as many might initially guess, though traditional room and boards may be based primarily on a Social Security Disability payment and limited governmental personnel assistance. More expensive residential care homes now exist to offer a family-style, high quality, care option to the next class of senior care which is Assisted Living Facilities. These homes, operated often by the nursing care industry, are based on increasing need for assistance and decreasing independence. Unlike the proposals for upgraded community services in homes and communities for seniors with substantial needs, assisted living was primarily developed as facility types only; supported housing also was a new model as state initiatives.
Seniors, disability and aging
There are various levels of residential care homes for seniors, which is the traditional medical system of assessments, which differs from developing person-centered plans and support services for persons who may have substantial health care needs and also from new managed Medicaid care plans. In addition, in some fields, the plan is for the individual to age in place in their group home setting. Personal care assistance is often associated with aging in place and independent living services; local governments have been reluctant to pay for other than limited services in the homes (one study stated up to 20 hours maximum, others 3–4 hours per week), in spite of a nationwide decades press toward our own governments. This position is similar to a governmental position to pay not for ordinary goods, but only for specialized services.
However, senior services of other kinds, including the senior centers, low cost meals, transportation, Veteran's health services and independent clubs, specialized day care (e.g., day care for older adult policies in Great Britain), local case managers, local Offices of the Aging (with Disability coordinators in some locations), and so forth are often available. Senior programs may also involve joint integration initiatives by aging and disability agencies resulting in leading programs such as social model day programs in Oneida County, New York, Rhode Island's Apartment Residence, Madison County Integration Program, and supported retirement programs in the state of Utah.
Assisted living is a modernization effort (e.g., more choices or menus of services) in the nursing care fields which primarily resulted in modernization, to some extent, of the large facility (i.e., nursing homes) or campus models. Large state initiatives can be found in Linking Housing and Services for Older Adults representing response to long-term criticism of a facility-based service industry. However, a recent nursing industry schema, reflecting a provider network, for levels of care states: "Assisted Living With no Assistance" (the most common use of "assisted living" involves little or no assistance, living at home with minimal amounts of home care), "Assisted Living with Assistance", and "Assisted Living - Memory Care". Memory care is for those dealing with memory loss, dementia, or Alzheimer's disease.
However, the call nationwide is for caregiving services in the homes where aging parents often move to live with their adult children and their families. The provider sector desired are those that respect the wishes of the individual and the family, including for care at home through hospice. The New Politics of Old Age Policy (Robert Hudson, 2005/2010) calls for the government entertaining care credits or generous minimum benefits to assist US families to juggle paid and unpaid work in today's modernized world. In addition, as parents age, adults with disabilities who may be living at home will also need assistance that might not have been needed earlier (e.g., siblings, new home).
- Halfway house
- Residential Child Care Communities
- Teaching-family model
- Congregate Care
- Cottage Homes
- Substance dependence
- Supported living
- Supported housing
- Family support
- Foster Care
- Foster Care in the United States
- Residential treatment center
- Residential Care
- Independent living
- Community integration
- Assisted living
- Community-based care
- Child and family services
- Kinship Care
- Child and youth care
- Child abuse
- Child abandonment
- Wraparound (childcare)
- Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. "Group homes". Retrieved 4 May 2012.
- Close, D.W. (1977). Community living for severely and profoundly retarded adults: A group home study. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 12(3): 256–262.
- Julie Ann Racio (2012). "Community & disability: Deinstitutionalization". American Society for Public Administration. Retrieved 2017-07-29.
- Cain, K. (1982, May 12). Small group setting best for severely retarded, experts say. Syracuse Herald American. Syracuse, NY via Syracuse University's Center on Human Policy 1971–1989 newspaper collection.
- Slackman, M. (1988, February 27). Immediate increase sought in group homes. Gannett Westchester Newspapers, p. 7.
- Babic, B., & Pluto, L. (2007). Participation in residential child care in Germany. Scottish Journal of Residential Child Care, 6(2), 32.
- Hill, B. & Lakin, K.C. (1986, April). Classification of residential facilities for individuals with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 24(2): 107–115.
- Braddock, D., Hemp, R., Rizzolo, M.C., Tanis, E., Haffer, L., Lulinski, A. & Wu, J. (2013). State of the States in Developmental Disabilities 2013: The Great Recession and its Aftermath. Denver, CO: Department of Psychiatry and Colemand Institute, University of Colorado, Department of Disability and Human Development, University of Illinois-Chicago, and American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
- Dever, R (1989). A taxonomy of community living skills. Exceptional Children, 55(5): 395-404.
- Schleien, S., Ash, T., Kiernan, J. & Wehman, P. (1981, Summer). Developing independent cooking skills in a profoundly retarded woman. Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 2: 23–29.
- Nietupski, J., Welch, J. & Wacker, D. (1983). Acquisition, maintenance, and transfer of grocery item purchasing skills by moderately and severely handicapped students. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 18(4): 279–286.
- Van Den Pol, R., Iwata, B., Ivanic, M., Page, T., Neef, N., & Whitley, F. Paul. (1981). Teaching the handicapped to eat in public places: Acquisition, generalization and maintenance of restaurant skills. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 14: 61–69.
- Risley, R. & Cuvo, A.J. (1980). Training mentally retarded adults to make emergency telephone calls. Behavior Modification, 4(4): 513–525.
- Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. "Group home". Retrieved 4 May 2012.
- United Nations ENABLE. (2006). UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. NY, NY: Author.
- Brown, S. (2014). International Agenda on Disability and Human Rights. In: J. Racino, Public Administration and Disability: Community Services Administration in the US. (pp. 279–296). London: CRC Press.
- Bruininks, R., Kudle, M., Wieck, C. & Hauber, F. (198, June). Management problems in community residential facilities. Mental Retardation, 18: 125–130
- Ford, A., Brown, L., Pumpian, I., Baumgart, D., Nisbet, J., Schroeder, J. & Loomis, R. (nd). Strategies for developing individualized recreation and leisure programs for severely handicapped students. Adapted from Brown et al, (1980). Curricular Strategies for Teaching Severely Handicapped Student Functional and Nonfunctional Skills in School and NonSchool Environments. Vol. X. Madison, WI: Madison Metropolitan School District.
- Geddes, D.J. (1988, September 1). Award-winning "Regular Lives" to be seen nationally on PBS. The Syracuse Record. Syracuse, NY.
- Shaw, K. & Garfat, T. (2003). From front line to family home: A youth care approach to working with families. Child and Family Services, 25(1/2): 39–65.
- Amaro, H., McGraw, S., Larson, M., Lopez, L., & Nieves, R. (2004). Boston Consortium of Services for Families in Recovery: A trauma-informed intervention model for women's alcohol and drug addiction treatment. In: B. Veysey & C. Clark, Responding to Physical and Sexual Abuse in Women with Alcohol and Other Drug and Mental Disorders. (pp. 95–119). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
- US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Mental Health. (1991, July). Residential treatment centers and other organized mental health care for children and youth: United States, 1988. Mental Health Statistical Note No. 198. Washington, DC: Author.
- Wellis, K. (1991, July). Placement of emotionally disturbed children in residential treatment: A review of placement criteria. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61(3): 339-347.
- Stroul, B. (1996). Children's Mental Health: Creating System of Care in a Changing Society. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Friedman, R. M. (1994). Restructuring of systems to emphasize prevention and family support. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23 (Supplement): 40-48-7.
- Lord, J. & Ochoka, J. (1995). Outcomes of an individualized family support program. Journal of Leisurability, 22(4): 22–32.
- Kutash, K. & Rivera, V. (1996). "What Works in Children's Mental health Services? Uncovering Answers to Critical Questions." Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Fields, S. (1990, April). The relationship between residential treatment and supported housing in a comimunity system of services. "Psychosocial Rehabilitation", 13(4): 105–114.
- Gothelf, C. (1987). The availability of community resources to group homes in New York City. (pp. 146–164). In: R.F. Antonak & J. A. Mullick, Transitions in Mental Retardation Volume 3: The Community Imperative Revisited. Norwood, NJ: ABLEX Publishing.
- Baker, B.L., Seltzer, G.B. & Seltzer, M.M. (1977). Ch. 3: Small group home. As Close as Possible: Community Residences for Retarded Adults. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
- Racino, J. (2000). Ch. 3: From residential services to housing and support. Personnel Preparation in Disability and Community Life: Toward Universal Approaches to Support. (pp. 47–72). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.
- Nutter, D. & Reid, D. (1978). Teaching retarded women a clothing selection skill using community norms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11: 475–487.
- Jacobson, J., Silver, E. & Schwartz, A.(1984, October). Service provision in New York's group homes. Mental Retardation, 22(5): 231–259.
- "Southeast Queens Press - Feature". Queenspress.com. Retrieved 2012-01-08.
- "Retarded adult" home proposed for DeWitt.(1979, June 1). Syracuse Post-Standard, Page 8-East.
- Racino, J. A. (1998). Innovations in family support: What are we learning? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 7(4): 433–449.
- "Troubled Teen Ministries". Troubled Teen Ministries. 1970-01-01. Retrieved 2012-01-08.
- "Group Homes for Troubled Teens". Troubledteenministries.com. 1970-01-01. Retrieved 2012-01-08.
- Adoption.com. "Group Home". Retrieved 4 May 2012.
- Taylor, S.J., Lakin, K.C., & Hill, B. (1989). Permanency planning for children and youth: Out-of-home placement decisions. Exceptional Children, 55(6):541-549.
- "Group Homes". Department of Social Services. 2007. Retrieved February 10, 2016.
- Lakin, K.C., Bruininks, R., Chen, T., Hill, B. & Andersen, D. (1993). Personal characteristics and competence of people with mental retardation living in foster homes and small group homes. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 97(6):616-627.
- Thompson RW, Smith GL, Osgood DW, Dowd TP, Friman PC, Daly DL. Residential care: A study of short- and long-term educational effects. Children and Youth Services Review. 1996;18(3):221–242.
- Larzelere RE, Daly EL, Davis JL, Chmelka MB, Handwerk ML. Outcome evaluation of Girls and Boys Town s Family Home Program. Education and Treatment of Children. 2004;27(2):130–149.
- Slot NW, Jagers HD, Dangel RF. Cross-cultural replication and evaluation of the Teaching Family Model of community-based residential treatment. Behavioral Residential Treatment. 1992;7(5):341–354.
- Biklen, D. (1987). Small Homes: Westport Associates. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University, Center on Human Policy, Research and Training Center on Community Integration.
- Racino, J. (1989). Individualized supportive living arrangements: Pride, North Dakota. In: S. Taylor, R. Bogdan & J. Racino (Eds.), Life in the Community: Case Studies of Organizations Supporting People with Disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Alternatives for Community Living, Family Support, and Group Homes. (1986). News Digest. Washington, DC: Information from the National Information Center for Handicapped Children and Youth.
- O'Brien, J. & O'Brien, C.L. (1991, August). More than Just a New Address: Images of Organizations for Supportive Living. Lithonia, GA: Responsive Systems Associate.
- Carling, P. (1992). Homes or group homes? Future approaches to housing, support, and integration of persons with psychiatric disabilities. Adult Residential Care Journal, 6(2): 87-96.
- Anthony, W., Cohen, M., Farkas, M. & Gagnes, C. (2002). Supported housing. Psychiatric Rehabilitation. Boston, MA: Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Services, Boston University.
- Racino, J., Walker, P., O'Connor, S. & Taylor, S. (1993). Housing, Support and Community. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Condeluci, A., Cooperman, S. & Self, B.A. (1987). Independent living: Settings and supports. (pp. 301-347). In: M. Ylivasker & E. Gobble, Community Re-Entry for Head Injured Adults. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.
- Harp, H. T. (1990, April). Independent living with support services: The goal and future for mental health consumers. "Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal", 13(4): 85–90.
- SeniorServiceMatch. "Find a Group Home Facility Near You!". Retrieved 4 May 2012.
- Racino, J. (2014), Public Administration and Disability: Community Services Administration in the US. NY, NY: CRC Press.
- Schrader, Alvin M. and Brundin, Michael R. 2002. "National Core Library Statistics Program Statistical Report, 1999: Cultural and Economic Impact of Libraries on Canada." p.15
- Hill, M., Wehman, P., Kregel, J., Banks, P. D., & Metzler, H. (1987). Employment outcomes for people with moderate and severe disabilities: An eight-year longitudinal analysis of supported competitive employment. JASH, 12(3): 182-189.
- Blanck, P. (2000). Employment, Disability and the Americans with Disabilities Act: Issues in Law, Public Policy and Research. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
- Racino, J. & Whittico, P. (1998). The promise of self-advocacy and community employment. In: Wehman, P. & Kregel, J., More than a Job: Securing Satisfying Careers for People with Disabilities. (pp. 47–69). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Shern, D.L., Wilson, N., Ellis, R., Bartsch, D. & Coen, A. (1986, Fall). Planning a continuum of residential service settings for the chronically mentally ill: The Colorado experience. Community Mental Health Journal, 22(3): 190–202.
- Taylor, S.J., Racino, J., Knoll, J. & Lutfiyya, Z.M. (1987). The Nonrestrictive Environment: On Community Integration of Persons with Severe Disabilities. Syracuse, NY: Human Policy Press.
- Burns, T. (2010, April). The rise and fall of assertive community treatment. International Review of Psychiatry, 22(2): 130-137.
- Larson, S., Sedelzky, L., Hewitt, A., & Blakeway, C., (2014). Community Support Services Workforce in the US. In: J. Racino, Public Administration and Disability: Community Services Administration in the US. NY, NY: CRC Press.
- Gage, M., Fredericks, B., Johnson-Dorn, N. & Linley-Southard, B. (1982). Inservice training for staffs of group homes and work activity centers serving developmentally disabled adults. TASH Journal, 7(4): 60-70.
- Demchak, M.A. & Browder, D. (1990, June). An evaluation of the pyramid model of staff training in group homes for adults with severe handicaps. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 25: 150-163.
- Smith, T., Parker, T., Taubman, M. & Lovaas, O.I. (1992). Transfer of staff training from workshops to group homes: A failure to generalize across settings. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 13:57-71.
- Zane, T., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., Handen, B., & Fox, C.J. (1982). Validation of a competency-based training program in developmental disabilities. Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 8: 21–31.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (2011). Sef-directed services: Communities and long-term supports. Washington, DC: Author.
- Cole, H. & Lacefield, W. (1978, October). Skill domains critical to the helping professions. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 57: 115–123.
- Raskin, N. (1975, Spring). Learning through human encounters. Improving University and College Teaching, 23(2): 71-74.
- Kaylanpur, M. & Harry, B. (1999). Culture in Special Education: Building Reciprocal Family-Professional Relationships. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Marholin, D., O'Toole, K., Touchette, P., Berger, P. & Doyle, D. (1979). "I'll have a Big Mac, Large Fries, Large Coke, and Apple Pie"...or Teaching Adaptive Community Skills. Behavior Therapy, 10: 236–248.
- Pace, S. & Turkel, W. (1990, April). Participants, community volunteers and staff: A collaborative approach to housing and support. "Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal", 13(4): 81–84.
- Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. & Lutfiyya, Z. (1995). "The Variety of Community Experience: Qualitative Studies of Family and Community Life". London: Paul H. Brookes.
- Lutfiyya, Z.M. (1995). Baking bread together: A study of membership and inclusion. (pp. 117–139). In: S.J. Taylor, R. Bogdan, & Z.M. Lutfiyya, "The Variety of Community Experience: Qualitative Studies of Family and Community Life". Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Lipton, B. (2004). Gay Men Living with Chronic Illness and Disabilities: From Crisis to Crossroads. London: Haworth Press.
- Rogers, E.S., Danley, K., Anthony, W.A., Martin, R., & Walsh, D. (1994). The residential needs and preferences of persons with serious mental illness: A comparison of consumers and family members. The Journal of Mental Health Administration, 21(1): 42–51.
- Condeluci, A., Cooperman, S. .& Self, B.A. (1987). Independent living: Settings and supports. (pp. 301–347). In: M. Ylivasker & E. Gobble, Community Re-Entry for Head Injured Adults. Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Co.
- Jones, M., Patrick, P. D., Evans, R.W. & Wuff, J.J. (1991). The life coach model of community re-entry. In: B. McMahon & L. Shaw, Work Worth Doing. Orlando, FL: Paul M. Deutsch.
- Iceman, D. & Dunlop, W. (1984). Independent living skills training: A survey of current practices. Journal of Rehabilitation, 50: 53–56.
- Rizzolo, M., Friedman, C., Lulinski-Norris, A. & Braddock, D. (2013). HCBS waivers: A nationwide study of states: Intellectual and developmental disabilities. American Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 51(1): 1–21.
- Lewis, D. & Johnson, D. (2005). Costs of family care for individuals with developmental disabilities. In: R. Stancliffe & K. C. Lakin, Costs and Outcomes of Community Services for People with Intellectual Disabilities. (pp. 63-89). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Bradley, V.J. & Conroy, J. W. (1983). X. Client-Specific Costs. Third Year Comprehensive Report of the Pennhurst Longitudinal Study. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University.
- American Association for Retired Persons. (2012). Across the States: Profiles of Long-Term Services and Supports.(9th Edition). Washington, DC: Public Policy Institute.
- Romer, L.T. (1987). Neighborhood Living Project Management and Finance Training Package. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, Center on Human Development, Cost:$5.00
- Pynoos, J., Liebig, P., Alley, D., & Nishita, C. (2004). Homes of choice: Towards more effective linkages between housing and support. In: J. Pynoos, P. Hollander Feldman, & J. Ahrens, Linking Housing and Services for Older Adults: Obstacles, Opportunities and Options. (pp. 5–39). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
- McGowan, K. (2002). Beyond getting sick. In: J. O'Brien & C.L. O'Brien, Implementing Person-Centered Planning. (pp. 215–230). Toronto, Canada: Inclusion Press.
- Beisgen, B. & Kroitchman, M. (2003). Senior Centers: Opportunities for Successful Aging. NY, NY: Springer Publishing Co.
- Clark, C. (2001). Adult Day Services and Social Inclusion. Aberdeen, UK: Robert Gordon University and London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
- Force, L. & O'Malley, M. (1998). Adult day services. (pp. 294–315). In: M Janicki, A. J. Dalton, "Dementia, Aging and Intellectual Disabilities: A Handbook." Castleton, JY: Hamilton Printing Co.
- Janicki, M. & Keefe, R. (1992). "Casebook: Integration Experiences." Albany, NY: New York State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities.
- Pynoos, J., Feldman Hollander, P., & Ahrens, J. (2004). "Linking Housing and Services for Older Adults: Obstacles, Options and Opportunities". (pp. 5–39). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
- Memory Care Home Solutions. "Mission". Retrieved 4 May 2012.
- Hudson, R. (2005/2010). The New Politics of Old Age Policy (2nd edition). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins.