Volume 31, Issue 5 pp. 905-914
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

How frontline staff manage paperwork in group homes for people with intellectual disability: Implications for practice

Claire Quilliam

Corresponding Author

Claire Quilliam

Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia

Correspondence

Claire Quilliam, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Christine Bigby

Christine Bigby

Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Jacinta Douglas

Jacinta Douglas

Living with Disability Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia

The Summer Foundation, Melbourne, Vic., Australia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 08 May 2018
Citations: 11

Abstract

Background

Paperwork is a key tool that transforms organizational intentions into actions in group homes, although prescriptive procedures may limit how frontline staff use it in practice. The aim of this study was to explore how frontline staff use paperwork in group homes for people with intellectual disability and identify practice implications.

Method

Constructivist grounded theory methodology guided the research. Data collection included semi-structured interviews and participant observations. Coding, comparison and sorting methods were adopted to analyse how staff used paperwork.

Results

Staff followed organizational paperwork rules when they aligned with their resident-focused approach to work. When they perceived rules to misalign with this approach, they managed paperwork by adjusting the time and place of completion, managing content, creating alternative tools and refusing completion.

Conclusions

Staff purposefully managed paperwork rather than simply following procedures. Disability service organizations could develop flexible paperwork procedures and include frontline perspectives in paperwork development.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interests in this study.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.