Date of Conferral
2022
Degree
Ph.D.
School
Human Services
Advisor
Andrew Carpenter
Abstract
There are numerous programs in the United States (US) that provide services and supports for people with disabilities with significant monetary costs and poor outcomes. Current research lacked information regarding how use of strengths-based approaches by community development practitioners supports people with disabilities and builds social capital. The purpose of this qualitative single case study was to explore community development practitioners’ use of strengths-based approaches to support people with disabilities in their communities. The conceptual framework of social capital was used for the study. The research question involved how community development practitioners identify and provide methods to support people with disabilities within their communities. Interviews were conducted with 10 practitioners in the US who have experience with strengths-based methods in communities that included (purposefully or not) people with disabilities. Data were collected through interviews via Zoom and telephone and organized, categorized, and coded to identify themes using Yin’s five-step data analysis. Analysis of data revealed that community development practitioners engage in strength-based methods to further expand opportunities for people with disabilities to be included in their communities. Findings may provide information to further enhance programs and services that create positive social change for people with disabilities such as decreased social isolation in their communities. Further research is recommended regarding specific programs and funding opportunities for people with disabilities in their communities.
Recommended Citation
Lourash, Allison E., "Community Development Practitioner Methods to Support People with Disabilities" (2022). Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 12758.
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/12758
Included in
Disability Studies Commons, Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons