Moving on together: what makes a successful transition into adulthood for young disabled people (14-25 years of age)?

The author aimed to understand the transition process, the contextual relationships, and the external and internal mechanisms facilitated by a Transition Key Worker and how they may create opportunities to achieve good outcomes for CYP moving into adulthood.

  • Theme: Achieving long-term outcomes and making a difference to lived experiences
  • Strength: Robust
  • Breadth of Impact: Robust
  • Status: Quality Assured
View & Download Resources

The author aimed to understand the transition process, the contextual relationships, and the external and internal mechanisms facilitated by a Transition Key Worker and how they may create opportunities to achieve good outcomes for children and young people moving into adulthood.

They found parents’ poor experiences of ‘pre-transitional’ support hindered preparation for their child’s future and determined their ability to think positively and let go of the past. However, children and young people were not majorly concerned about the future. Structuring the transition process, having support, planning well to make active decisions, with parents being ready for change within a robust governance and accountability framework determined what makes a successful transition. Transition Key Workers were regarded as an essential facilitator of the process. How to plan effectively and in detail with young people was absent.

This grey literature was appraised using a validated checklist. The AACODS checklist provides guidance when dealing with diverse formats of grey literature (Tyndall, 2010). AACODS includes the following items: Authority (who is responsible for the intellectual content) – Accuracy – Coverage (parameters which define the content coverage i.e., reference to a particular population group, or certain type of publication) – Objectivity (identify bias, if it is unstated or unacknowledged) – Date (that confirms relevance of information)- Significance (value judgment in the context of the relevant research area). The checklist can be used for any discipline area and prioritises expert opinion and expertise over source format (Tyndall, 2010).