Abstract
Person-centered planning is becoming a popular means of designing supports for people with disabilities. However, very little research evaluating person-centered planning exists. We evaluated the degree to which items and activities reported to be preferred in person-centered plans represented accurate preferences based on how individuals responded when presented with the items and activities. Person-centered planning meetings were conducted with 4 individuals with profound multiple disabilities to develop preference maps and to identify leisure-related preferences. A sample of the reported preferences in the plans was then systematically assessed by observing each participant's approach and avoidance responses to the items and activities. Of the sampled items and activities reported to be preferred in the plans, 42% represented moderate preferences based on the latter assessment process and 33% represented strong preferences. With 2 participants, several preferences identified in the plans were nonpreferred items and activities based on the preference assessments, and some were frequently avoided. These results suggested that although person-centered plans may identify some accurate preferences for people with profound multiple disabilities, this approach should be used cautiously. Results also suggested that such plans should be supplemented with systematic preference assessments to ensure the accuracy of identified preferences. Future research areas focus on evaluating other aspects of person-centered planning.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (117.0 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Favell J. E., Cannon P. R. Evaluation of entertainment materials for severely retarded persons. Am J Ment Defic. 1977 Jan;81(4):357–361. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fisher W. W., Piazza C. C., Bowman L. G., Amari A. Integrating caregiver report with systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. Am J Ment Retard. 1996 Jul;101(1):15–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fisher W., Piazza C. C., Bowman L. G., Hagopian L. P., Owens J. C., Slevin I. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 1992 Summer;25(2):491–498. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Green C. W., Reid D. H., Canipe V. S., Gardner S. M. A comprehensive evaluation of reinforcer identification processes for persons with profound multiple handicaps. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Fall;24(3):537–552. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-537. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Green C. W., Reid D. H. Defining, validating, and increasing indices of happiness among people with profound multiple disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Spring;29(1):67–78. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1996.29-67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Green C. W., Reid D. H., Perkins L. I., Gardner S. M. Increasing habilitative services for persons with profound handicaps: an application of structural analysis to staff management. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Fall;24(3):459–471. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Green C. W., Reid D. H., White L. K., Halford R. C., Brittain D. P., Gardner S. M. Identifying reinforcers for persons with profound handicaps: staff opinion versus systematic assessment of preferences. J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Spring;21(1):31–43. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1988.21-31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hagner D., Helm D. T., Butterworth J. "This is your meeting": a qualitative study of person-centered planning. Ment Retard. 1996 Jun;34(3):159–171. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mason S. A., McGee G. G., Farmer-Dougan V., Risley T. R. A practical strategy for ongoing reinforcer assessment. J Appl Behav Anal. 1989 Summer;22(2):171–179. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1989.22-171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Newton J. S., Ard W. R., Jr, Horner R. H. Validating predicted activity preferences of individuals with severe disabilities. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Summer;26(2):239–245. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
- Pace G. M., Ivancic M. T., Edwards G. L., Iwata B. A., Page T. J. Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. J Appl Behav Anal. 1985 Fall;18(3):249–255. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Parsons M. B., Harper V. N., Jensen J. M., Reid D. H. Assisting older adults with severe disabilities in expressing leisure preferences: a protocol for determining choice-making skills. Res Dev Disabil. 1997 Mar-Apr;18(2):113–126. doi: 10.1016/s0891-4222(96)00044-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Windsor J., Piché L. M., Locke P. A. Preference testing: a comparison of two presentation methods. Res Dev Disabil. 1994 Nov-Dec;15(6):439–455. doi: 10.1016/0891-4222(94)90028-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]