JCPSLP Vol 18 no 2 July 2016

Table 2. Summary of the 12 studies included in the review in order of study strength (continued)

Blyth & Gardner, 2007)

Explore contributing

North-west England, United Kingdom

N = 7 parents of children with disabilities

Qualitative semi- structured interviews Grounded theory approach Qualitative semi- structured interviews

Major themes identified: – Reducing caregiver stress – Greater sense of autonomy & control – Greater sense of choice and flexibility in selecting additional supports – Greater social participation confidence and independence – Greater social participation – Improved family and social relations – Improved emotional well-being – Not aware of available options to spend budget on – Limited choice on what to spend budget on Anecdotal reports of: – Autonomy/control,

4/10

Major weaknesses: – Limited

factors leading to SDF take-up

information on data analysis

3.5/10

Weaver, 2012

Evaluation of SDF by the Integrated

Warwickshire, England, United Kingdom

N = 10 families with children

Major weaknesses: – Limited

aged 0–19 years) with disabilities

Disability Service, a

information provided on findings – No analysis of results

support service for people with disabilities

43 families who had received SDF subsample from N = 93)

Open-ended questions from self- administered questionnaire

Benefits to using SDF – Increased flexibility – Autonomy/control Process difficulties – Information – Eligibility – Assessment – Administration

Welch et al., 2012

To explore families’ motivations for and experiences of using SDF

United Kingdom Participants recruited from 21 Aiming High for Disabled Children Pathfinder authorities; and 2 Change

3/10

Major weaknesses: – Unclear how the sample was selected – Methods of data collection unclear – Qualitative

Champion authorities

data analysis lacked rigour

Cowen, Murray, & Duffy, 2011

Evaluation of the use of SDF for

Sheffield, United Kingdom

N = 23 young adults with complex needs and their families

Qualitative case studies

Anecdotal reports of: – Autonomy/control – Greater social participation – Employment gains

1/10

Major weaknesses: – Limited

young adults with complex needs exiting secondary school Pilot evaluation of the use of IBs for young adults with learning disabilities exiting secondary school

information on study design, recruitment and analysis

0.5/10

Donnelly & Brooke- Mawson, 2008

Bradford, Yorkshire, United Kingdom

N = 6 young adults with learning disabilities and their families

Qualitative case studies

Anecdotal reports of: – Greater sense of

autonomy, control, and flexibility

Major weaknesses: – Limited

– Reduction in stress – Improved quality of life – Time management and cost a challenge – Limited choice of what to spend money on

information on study design, recruitment and analysis

Note. SDF = self-directed funding IB = Individual budgets

59

JCPSLP Volume 18, Number 2 2016

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au