PART-E - Participation Assessment with Recombined Tools-Enfranchisement
Overview
- Purpose
- Measure community participation enfranchisement
- Administration Method
- Interview
- Administration Mode
- Phone
- Item Count
- 19
- Population
- Traumatic Brain Injury
Instrument Citation(s)
Heinemann, A.W., Lai, J., Magasi, S., Hammel, J., Corrigan, J.D., Bogner, J.A., & Whiteneck, G.G. (2011).
Measuring Participation Enfranchisement. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92,
564-571.
Heinemann, A.W., Magasi, S., Bode, R.K., Hammel, J., Whiteneck, G.G., Bogner, J.A., & Corrigan, J.D.
(2013). Measuring Enfranchisement: Importance of and control over participation by people
with disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94, 2157-2165.
Instrument Domains
| Domain | Number of Items |
|---|---|
| Choice and Control | 6 |
| Personal freedoms and dignity of risk | 6 |
| Choice of services and supports | 0 |
| Personal choices and goals | 0 |
| Self-direction | 0 |
| Community Inclusion | 9 |
| Meaningful activity | 2 |
| Social connectedness and relationships | 8 |
| Employment | 0 |
| Resources and settings to facilitate inclusion | 0 |
| Transportation | 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 |
| 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 |
| Holistic Health and Functioning | 0 |
| Health promotion and prevention | 0 |
| Individual health and functioning | 0 |
| Human and Legal Rights | 0 |
| Freedom from abuse and neglect | 0 |
| Informed decision-making | 0 |
| Optimizing the preservation of legal and human rights | 0 |
| Privacy | 0 |
| Supporting individuals in exercising their human and legal rights | 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 |
| Workforce | 0 |
| Adequately compensated with benefits | 0 |
| Culturally competent | 0 |
| Demonstrated competencies when appropriate | 0 |
| Person-centered approach to services | 0 |
| Safety of and respect for the worker | 0 |
| Staff Turnover | 0 |
| Sufficient workforce numbers dispersion and availability | 0 |
| Workforce engagement and participation | 0 |
Psychometric Citations
Heinemann, A.W., Lai, J., Magasi, S., Hammel, J., Corrigan, J.D., Bogner, J.A., & Whiteneck, G.G. (2011).
Measuring Participation Enfranchisement. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92,
564-571.- Type of Publication
- Peer review
- Instrument Language
- English
- Sample: Age (Mean and Range)
Mean=55 years
- Sample: Age Group
Under 18 Years, 18-64 Years, 65+ Years
- Sample: Countries/State
Colorado
- Sample: Disability Type
Physical Disability, Traumatic Brain Injury, Other
- Sample: Gender (%male)
37%
- Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)
94% white
- Sample: Sampling Strategy
a randomly selected, statewide sample
- Sample: Size
912
- Reliability: Internal Consistency
person reliability =. 77
- Validity: Construct (Convergent and Discriminant)
Exploratory factor analysis resulted in three factors with factor loading > .04;
Confirmatory factor analysis: CFI=.856; TLI=.963; RMSE=.104;
Persons without self-identified disabilities reported a higher level of enfranchisement than did persons with disabilities
- Study design
- Cross-sectional
Heinemann, A.W., Magasi, S., Bode, R.K., Hammel, J., Whiteneck, G.G., Bogner, J.A., & Corrigan, J.D. (2013). Measuring Enfranchisement: Importance of and control over participation by people with disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94, 2157-2165.
- Type of Publication
- Peer review
- Instrument Language
- English
- Sample: Age (Mean and Range)
Mean=53 years
- Sample: Age Group
18-64 Years
- Sample: Countries/State
United States
- Sample: Disability Type
Not Reported
- Sample: Gender (%male)
51%
- Sample: Race/Ethnicity (%)
72% white;
12% black;
7% Hispanic- Sample: Sampling Strategy
Random sampling
- Sample: Size
1163
- Reliability: Internal Consistency
person reliability =. 80
- Validity: Construct (Convergent and Discriminant)
Exploratory factor analysis resulted in 2 factors with factor loadings > .40
Confirmatory factor analysis: CFI=.94, RMSEA=.13 for control factor; CFIZ=.95, RMSEA=.10 for the importance factor;
Rasch analysis on the importance and control scales;
The control and importance measure varied significantly across levels of disability severity;
- Study design
- Cross-sectional