Page 56 - Demo

Chapter 254efforts towards implementation, and informs those involved in governance and quality control about the adequacy of these efforts and the need for further adjustments and efforts towards implementation (Schippers, 2019; Bisschops et al., 2022). Despite the limitations of administrative data (Wolpert & Rutter, 2018), these data may be useful to observe trends over time, and to make statements about the influence of broad political legislative and organisational policy changes. Moreover, the effort direct care staff puts into registration of administrative data (Schuengel et al., 2020) makes it possible to generate data sets used for research. These data sets are fruitful because they allow organisations to reflexively monitor the effectiveness of the policies, laws and regulations that organisations are trying to implement (May et al., 2009). The current study emphasises the value of using administrative care data for evaluating the quality of intellectual disability care, and provides an encouraging example of how such data may be analysed to examine the impact of policy changes on recordings of clients%u2019 care over time.Legislation such as the CCA that protect the freedom of choice of clients receiving long-term care does not necessarily have an immediate effect on care and support in everyday practice (Bj%u00f6rne et al., 2022; Northway et al., 2007). Comparable legislation in other countries even showed unintended consequences and side-effects, such as unregistered use of restrictive measures in Sweden (Bj%u00f6rne et al., 2022), deliberately misdiagnosing clients to receive care in Australia (Edwards et al., 2020), or being forced into the criminal justice system, which is unable to meet the needs of people with intellectual disabilities in New-Zealand (Brookbanks, 2019; Taylor, 2022). Therefore, implementing the CCA in the Netherlands needs to go side by side with cultural and behavioural changes in care organisations for people with intellectual disabilities. An organisational culture change that leads away from aggregating clients with challenging behaviour in specialised settings might help reduce the application of involuntary care (Robertson et al., 2005). It is also important to provide support staff with additional training and supervision, and to create a work-environment that is adapted to the needs of people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour, to change their practice and reduce the use of involuntary care. Treatment-models such as Positive Behaviour Support (Gerrard et al., 2019) and Triple-C (Tournier et al., 2020, 2022) may be implemented and