Olmstead v. L.C. upheld the civil rights of individuals with disabilities to live, learn, work, and socialize in the community of their choice. The built environment plays a role in the community integration of individuals with disabilities. The purpose of this study was to evaluate states’ Olmstead Plans to determine the extent to which they address the role of the built environment in community integration of individuals with disabilities. The majority of the reviewed plans did not demonstrate a reasonably clear acknowledgment of the role of the built environment in community integration. The Olmstead Plans did address housing and transportation. However, housing and transportation policies need to reach out beyond disability into the community to affect the community integration of individuals with disabilities. An important step toward community integration through community planning practices is the inclusion of individuals with disabilities in the standard community processes at the policy level.
ChristensenK. (2009). Socially equitable community planning; including individuals with disabilities in the democratic association of place. Review of Disability Studies, 5(3), 49–52.
5.
ChristensenK. (2010). The impact of the physical environment on the social integration of individuals with disabilities in community (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/720
6.
ChurchA.FrostM.SullivanK. (2000). Transport and social exclusion in London. Transport Policy, 7, 195–205.
7.
CoxM.StewartA.RosenbaumS. (2003). Review of the literature regarding community integration: Services necessary for individuals with disabilities to live in their own homes. Hamilton, NJ: Center for Health Services Policy and Research.
8.
CvitkovichY.WisterA. (2001). The importance of transportation and prioritization of environmental needs to sustain well-being among older adults. Environment & Behavior, 33, 809–829.
DijkersM. (1998). Community integration: Conceptual issues and measurement approaches in rehabilitation research. Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, 4(1), 1–15.
11.
DorvilH.MorinP.BeaulieuA.RobertD. (2005). Housing as a social integration factor for people classified as mentally ill. Housing Studies, 20, 497–519.
12.
EicherC.KawachiI. (2011). Social capital and community design. In DannenbergA. L.FrumkinH.JacksonR. J. (Eds.), Making healthy places (pp. 117–128). Washington, DC: Island Press.
13.
EloS.KyngäsH. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107–115.
14.
Fox-GrageW.FolkemerD.LewisJ. (2003). The States’ response to the Olmstead decision: How are states complying?Forum for State Health Policy Leadership, National Conference of State Legislatures, Washington, DC.
15.
GilderbloomJ. I.RosentraubM. S. (1990). Creating the accessible city: Proposals for providing housing and transportation for low income, elderly and disabled people. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 49, 271–282.
16.
GraneheimU. H.LundmanB. (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105–112.
17.
HandyS. L.NiemeierD. A. (1992). Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A, 29, 1175–1194.
18.
HsiehH. F.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288.
19.
ImrieR.KumarM. (1998). Focusing on disability and access in the built environment. Disability & Society, 13, 357–374.
20.
KenyonS. (2003). Understanding social exclusion and social inclusion. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineer, 156, 97–104.
21.
KochtitzkyC. S. (2011). Vulnerable populations and the built environment. In DannenbergA. L.FrumkinH.JacksonR. J. (Eds.), Making healthy places (pp. 129–145). Washington, DC: Island Press.
22.
LawM. (2002). Participation in the occupations of everyday life. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56, 640–649.
23.
LittleS. B. (2003). Public housing accommodations for individuals with disabilities. Journal of Health & Social Policy, 16(1-2), 93–107.
24.
LyonsG. (2003). The introduction of social exclusion into the field of travel behaviour. Transport Policy, 10, 339–342.
25.
MaiselJ. L. (2006). Toward inclusive housing and neighborhood design: A look at visitability. Community Development, 37(3), 26–34.
26.
MusterdS.AnderssonR. (2005). Housing mix, social mix, and social opportunities. Urban Affairs Review, 40, 761–790
NoconA.PleaceN. (1998). The housing needs of disabled people. Health and Social Care in the Community, 6, 361–369.
29.
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services, 28 CFR § 35.130(b)(7) (1991).
30.
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services, 28 CFR § 35.130(d) (1991).
31.
Olmstead v. L.C. 527 U.S. 581. (1999).
32.
PáezA.FarberS. (2012). Participation and desire: Leisure activities among Canadian adults with disabilities. Transportation, 39, 1055–1078.
33.
PáezA.MercadoR. G.FarberS.MorencyC.RoordaM. (2009, February). Mobility and social exclusion in Canadian communities: An empirical investigation of opportunity access and deprivation from the perspective of vulnerable groups (Report to Policy Research Directorate, Strategic Policy and Research). Gatineau, Quebec, Canada: Human Resources and Social Development Canada.
34.
PrestonJ.RajeF. (2007). Accessibility, mobility and transport-related social exclusion. Journal of Transportation Geography, 15, 151–160.
35.
RacinoJ. A. (1995). Community living for adults with developmental disabilities: A housing and support approach. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 20, 300–310.
36.
ShakespeareT.WatsonN. (2001). The social model of disability: An outdated ideology?Research in Social Science and Disability, 2, 9–28.
37.
ThomasC. (2004). How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches. Disability & Society, 19, 569–583.
38.
WehmeyerM. L.BoldingN. (2001). Enhanced self-determination of adults with intellectual disability as an outcome of moving to community-based work or living environments. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45, 371–383.
39.
WilsonS. M.HutsonM.MujahidM. (2008). How planning and zoning contribute to inequitable development, neighborhood health, and environmental injustice. Environmental Justice, 1, 211–216.
40.
WilsonS. M. (2009). An ecologic framework to study and address environmental justice and community health issues. Environmental Justice, 2, 15–23.
41.
WongY.-L. I.SolomonP. L. (2002). Community integration of persons with psychiatric disabilities in supportive independent housing: A conceptual model and methodological considerations. Mental Health Services Research, 4, 13–28.
Indiana. (2001, March28). Comprehensive plan for community integration and support of persons with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.in.gov/fssa/ddrs/2855.htm
Kentucky. (2009, October26). Cabinet for health services: Olmstead compliance plan for FY 2004 through FY 2012. Retrieved from http://chfs.ky.gov/os/Olmstead.htm
Missouri. (2010, September24). Missouri Governor’s Council on Disability: Vision and strategic and operational plan 2010-12. Retrieved from disability.mo.gov/gcd/pdf/GCDStrategicPlan.pdf
South Carolina. (2001, August31). South Carolina Home and Community-based Services Task Force: Report. Retrieved from http://www.scddc.state.sc.us/olmstd.pdf
Virginia. (2011, December6). Virginia’s comprehensive cross-governmental strategic plan to assure continued community integration of Virginians with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.olmsteadva.com/downloads/StrategicPlan.doc
