It has specifically referred to the integration of people with disabilities into US society[1][2] from the local to the national level, and for decades was a defining agenda in countries such as Great Britain.
[8] In disability circles, community integration meant opportunities for participation in schools, careers, homes, relationships, leisure, and a variety of interests and lifestyles.
"[12] The intent of community integration was the participation of people with disabilities in regular environments, the antithesis of exclusionary practices (such as the minority-group model).
[19] Before the Olmstead decision, the Supreme Court addressed the community integration issues multiple times in the case, Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hospital, a class action filed in Pennsylvania by attorney David Ferleger.
[21] The analysis of large-scale systems change in community integration has involved challenges by local public agencies, key elements of these strategies (e.g., enabling leadership, putting people first, values and vision, learning for quality), and its implications for national policy.
[43][44][45] In addition, redlining, as a bridge issue across lower and middle classes, affects housing and neighbourhood integration from as early as the 1970s with gerrymandering districts for community development funds more common in the 2000s.
[58][59] On the local level, concerns have included acceptance and friendships, support services, site accessibility, group size, and "truly integrated" (in contrast to side-by-side) activities; in Great Britain, for example, community opportunities were sought for people to belong, contribute and make friends.
[61] Recreational inclusion may be a camp,[62] a neighbourhood centre,[63] a girls' softball league,[64] school sports or technology clubs,[65] a community choir,[66] or a public-speaking course[67] as integrated social participation.
[80] In this context employment integration has been conceptualized, including social aspects of promotion, discriminatory hiring and termination practices, performance standards, job-sharing and modification, educational attainment, internships and volunteer experiences, workplace relationships, team-building, supervisory roles, workers' compensation, accommodations, and supports (Urban League of Onondaga County, 1978).
Employment integration is a worldwide issue, modified by approaches to multicultural groups (e.g. the growing Latino population in the US), the changing economy (e.g. from manufacturing to service), and increasing unemployment.
Community integration has been most criticized for its inattention to gender, ethnic, cultural, racial, class, and economic factors[81][82] ("double discrimination", pp. 60–61).
[89][90][91][92] Community integration was being diversely defined by researchers, including those in fields such as brain injury,[93][94] sensory impairments (e.g., hearing, visual),[95] developmental,[96] and physical disabilities.
[102] Comprehensive medical systems were proposed to support the family in community integration, including new roles for specialized personnel from neuropsychologists to physiatrists.
[103] In the field of traumatic brain injury, community integration was framed by both the social and medical models of disability to transition people from hospitals and rehabilitation centres.
[145] Community services support, integration and inclusion are changing in countries such as Czechoslovakia (now the Czech Republic and Slovakia),[146] Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, Austria, Great Britain, Iceland, and Sweden.
[147] Since the 1990s the European Union has formed, populations in the Middle East have been emancipated, community self-advocacy has developed in South America and Africa and financial ownership of US debt has been undertaken (in part) by China.
[148] The United Nations[149] offers guidance and leadership through its Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (particularly Article 19, which addresses independent living and community inclusion).