Efficacy of the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) to predict extraordinary support needs.
The SIS adds real value beyond IQ scores when you need to prove an adult with ID/DD needs extra paid support.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Wehmeyer et al. (2009) asked if the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) tells us more than IQ or daily-living scores.
They gave the SIS to adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities.
Then they checked whether SIS scores could predict who would need the most paid help.
What they found
SIS scores did predict higher funding needs.
The scale added new information that IQ and adaptive scores alone missed.
How this fits with other research
Arnkelsson et al. (2016) later showed the same scale works for adults with motor disabilities.
They found SIS scores explained most of the variance in support needs, backing up the 2009 result.
Seo et al. (2016) tested both child and adult SIS forms.
They showed the scores measure the same trait across ages, giving you confidence to use SIS-C or SIS-A.
Celletti et al. (2012) link the story to daily life: more support strategies and supported living raise quality of life for adults with ID.
Together, these papers say: use SIS to set hours, then deliver the supports it flags to boost outcomes.
Why it matters
If you write funding requests or plan services, add the SIS to your battery.
It takes 30–45 minutes and gives numbers that justify higher intensity hours.
Pair the score with evidence-based support strategies and you have a data-driven service plan that holds up in review.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Run one SIS interview this week and compare the score to your current hours request—adjust if the scale shows higher need.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Data were collected on 274 adults to investigate the efficacy of the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) as a tool to measure the support needs of individuals with intellectual and related developmental disabilities. Findings showed that SIS scores contributed significantly to a model that predicted greater levels of support need. Moreover, scores from different sections of the SIS made unique contributions to explaining variance associated with a variety of support need proxies. Finally, data suggest that the SIS measures a different construct than that measured by traditional assessments of personal competence. The implications of these findings for decision-making, including decisions affecting the disbursement of state developmental disability funding, are discussed.
American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2009 · doi:10.1352/2009.114:3-14