Quantifying the process and outcomes of person-centered planning.

Although person-centered planning is a popular approach in the field of developmental disabilities, there has been little systematic assessment of its process and outcomes. To measure person-centered planning, we developed three instruments designed to assess its various aspects. We then constructed variables comprising both a Process and an Outcome Index using a combined rational-empirical method. Test-retest reliability and measures of internal consistency appeared adequate. Variable correlations and factor analysis were generally consistent with our conceptualization and resulting item and variable classifications. Practical implications for intervention integrity, program evaluation, and organizational performance are discussed.

Compatibility of person-centered planning and applied behavior analysis.

In response to Osborne (1999), the aims and practices of person-centered planning (PCP) are compared to the basic principles of applied behavior analysis set forth by Baer, Wolf, and Risley (1968, 1987). The principal goal of PCP is social integration of people with disabilities; it qualifies as a socially important behavior, and its problems have been displayed sufficiently. However, social integration is a complex social problem whose solution requires access to system contingencies that influence lifestyles. Nearly all of the component goals of PCP proposed by O'Brien (1987b) have been reliably quantified, although concurrent measurement of outcomes such as friendship, autonomy, and respect presents a formidable challenge. Behavioral principles such as contingency and contextual control are operative within PCP, but problems in achieving reliable implementation appear to impede an experimental analysis.

A renaissance in residential behavior analysis? A historical perspective and a better way to help people with challenging behavior.

After a slow start, the popularity of applied behavior analysis for people with severe behavior problems peaked in the 1970s and was then battered down by the effects of methodological behaviorism, the aversives controversy, overregulation, and the inherent limitations of congregate living. Despite the ethical, technical, and conceptual advancements in behavior analysis, many people with challenging behavior live in futile environments in which the behavior analyst can only tinker. A radically behavioristic approach has become available that has the power to change these conditions, to restore the reciprocity necessary for new learning, and to bring residential behavior analysts more in contact with the contingencies of helping and teaching. The approach is consistent with alternatives that behaviorists have suggested for years to improve the image and effectiveness of applied behavior analysis, although it will take the behaviorist far from the usual patterns of practice. Finally, the approach promotes its own survival by promoting access to interlocking organizational contingencies, but its antithetical nature presents many conceptual and practical challenges to agency adoption.

Acknowledging barriers in adopting person-centered planning.

An apparent contradiction in adopting person-centered planning is exemplified by the question "If a system adopts person-centered planning, isn't it system-centered"? Such ambiguities are obvious to employees, who increasingly are being asked to consider more personalized ways of assisting people through person-centered planning. Our premise in this article is that employees' reservations are well-founded and should be addressed in order to facilitate understanding and eventual reconciliation of unavoidable conflicts that emerge when person-centered planning is undertaken by agency employees. Administrators who acknowledge the uncertainties accompanying person-centered planning and invite discussion about conceptual and practical difficulties inherent in its adoption are modeling a collaborative method of discovering ways to help people get what they need. Examples of group solutions are presented.