Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Including Group Quarters Residents With Household Residents Can Change What We Know About Working-Age People With Disabilities.

Information about residents of institutional and noninstitutional group quarters (GQ), particularly those with disabilities, has been limited by gaps in survey data, and statistics based on data that exclude some or all GQ residents are biased as estimates of total population statistics. We used the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Demography (Springer Nature) Vol. 49; no. 1; pp. 267 - 290
Autores principales: Stapleton, David, Honeycutt, Todd, Schechter, Bruce
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Information about residents of institutional and noninstitutional group quarters (GQ), particularly those with disabilities, has been limited by gaps in survey data, and statistics based on data that exclude some or all GQ residents are biased as estimates of total population statistics. We used the 2006 and 2007 American Community Survey (ACS) to identify the distribution of working-age populations with and without disabilities by major residence type and to assess the sensitivity of disability statistics to GQ residence. Our findings show that (1) of those with disabilities, about 1 in 13 males and 1 in 33 females live in GQ; (2) GQ rates are higher for individuals reporting mental, self-care, or go-outside-the-home disabilities than for those reporting sensory, physical, or employment disabilities; (3) younger males with disabilities are more likely to reside there, particularly at institutional GQ, reflecting their relatively high incarceration rate; (4) individuals with and without disabilities who are black, American Indian, were never married, or have less than a high school education have higher GQ residence rates; (5) 40% of male and 62% of female GQ residents have a disability; (6) adding GQ residents to household residents increases estimated disability prevalence for males by 6%, and the estimated difference between disability prevalence rates by gender nearly disappears; and (7) inclusion of the GQ population substantially lowers employment rate estimates for young males, blacks, and American Indians.