Peter Vietze

The Willowbrook Futures Project: A Longitudinal Analysis of Person-Centered Planning

We conducted a longitudinal comparative evaluation of person-centered planning processes and outcomes for 20 individuals with intellectual disabilities and problem behavior (former residents of Willowbrook) and a matched contrast group, who received traditional interdisciplinary service planning (ISP). At the inception of the study, all participants were living in one of four other developmental centers (institutions) in New York City. Process and outcome data obtained from questionnaires completed by team members approximately every 8 months at four time periods showed that the rate of improvement in both person-centered planning process and outcomes for the intervention group was significantly greater than that of the comparison group. Eighteen of 19 person-centered planning participants moved to community living arrangements, as did 5 of 18 in the contrast group.

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.

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, isnt 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.