Evaluating Social Inclusion Questionnaire
Overview
- Purpose
- To measure the level of social inclusion
- Respondent
- Person with a Disability
- Administration Method
- Interview
- Administration Mode
- In-person
- Item Count
- 18
- Population
- Mental Health Challenges
Instrument Citation(s)
Stickley, T., & Shaw, R. (2006). Evaluating social inclusion: Theodore Stickley and Rebecca Shaw describe a collaborative project in which a group of mental health service users and a mental health nurse lecturer developed a questionnaire to gauge the degree to which participants feel they are included in society. Mental Health Practice, 9(10), 14-21.
Instrument Domains
| Domain | Number of Items |
|---|---|
| Community Inclusion | 4 |
| Employment | 1 |
| Resources and settings to facilitate inclusion | 3 |
| Social connectedness and relationships | 1 |
| Meaningful activity | 0 |
| Transportation | 0 |
| Holistic Health and Functioning | 2 |
| Individual health and functioning | 2 |
| Health promotion and prevention | 0 |
| Human and Legal Rights | 2 |
| Optimizing the preservation of legal and human rights | 2 |
| Freedom from abuse and neglect | 0 |
| Informed decision-making | 0 |
| Privacy | 0 |
| Supporting individuals in exercising their human and legal rights | 0 |
| Workforce | 1 |
| Person-centered approach to services | 1 |
| Adequately compensated with benefits | 0 |
| Culturally competent | 0 |
| Demonstrated competencies when appropriate | 0 |
| Safety of and respect for the worker | 0 |
| Staff Turnover | 0 |
| Sufficient workforce numbers dispersion and availability | 0 |
| Workforce engagement and participation | 0 |
| Caregiver Support | 0 |
| Access to resources | 0 |
| Family caregiver/natural support involvement | 0 |
| Family caregiver/natural support wellbeing | 0 |
| Training and skill-building | 0 |
| Choice and Control | 0 |
| Choice of services and supports | 0 |
| Personal choices and goals | 0 |
| Personal freedoms and dignity of risk | 0 |
| Self-direction | 0 |
| Consumer Leadership in System Development | 0 |
| Evidence of meaningful caregiver involvement | 0 |
| Evidence of meaningful consumer involvement | 0 |
| System supports meaningful consumer involvement | 0 |
| Equity | 0 |
| Availability | 0 |
| Equitable access and resource allocation | 0 |
| Transparency and consistency | 0 |
| Fluctuation of Need | 0 |
| Level of Caregiver Well-Being | 0 |
| Person-Centered Planning and Coordination | 0 |
| Assessment | 0 |
| Coordination | 0 |
| Person-centered planning | 0 |
| Service Delivery and Effectiveness | 0 |
| Delivery | 0 |
| Person's needs met and goals realized | 0 |
| System Performance and Accountability | 0 |
| Data management and use | 0 |
| Evidence-based practice | 0 |
| Financing and service delivery structures | 0 |
Psychometric Citation
Federica Marino‐Francis, Anne Worrall‐Davies, (2010) "Development and validation of a social inclusion questionnaire to evaluate the impact of attending a modernised mental health day service", Mental Health Review Journal, Vol. 15 Issue: 1, pp.37-48, https://doi.org/10.5042/mhrj.2010.0201
- Type of Publication
- Peer review
- Instrument Language
- English
- Sample: Age (Mean and Range)
36-50
- Sample: Age Group
18-64 Years
- Sample: Countries/State
United Kingdom
- Sample: Disability Type
Mental Health Challenges
- Sample: Gender (%male)
36
- Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)
White 72%; Other 19%
- Sample: Sampling Strategy
Convenience Sample
- Sample: Size
69
- Reliability: Internal Consistency
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.80
- Reliability: Split-half
Spearman’s ⍴ between .312 and .820.
- Reliability: Test-retest
κ ranged between .121 and .824.
- Validity: Construct (Convergent and Discriminant)
EFA yielded the first seven factors (Eigenvalues >1.0) accounted for a total variance of 83.5% with the first factor accounting for nearly a third (29.8%) of the total variance.
- Study design
- Cross-Sectional