Evaluating the supports intensity scale as a potential assessment instrument for resource allocation for persons with intellectual disability.
SIS is a valid, reliable tool for deciding how many support dollars adults with intellectual disability should receive.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team tested the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) on 141 Taiwanese adults with intellectual disability.
They wanted to know if SIS scores could guide how much money and staff time each person gets.
They compared SIS results to three local tools already used for funding decisions.
What they found
SIS scores lined up best with how much help people need in real-life tasks like shopping or cooking.
The scale was reliable and matched clinician ratings better than medical labels or basic ADL checklists.
In short, SIS gave a clearer picture of support needs than the tools Taiwan was using.
How this fits with other research
Johnson et al. (2009) already showed that clinicians rank adults in the same order that SIS does.
Chou et al. (2013) now adds: those same scores can also decide budget levels.
Rispoli et al. (2011) tried SIS on adults with physical disabilities and saw weaker links to daily skills.
The scale works great for ID, but may need tweaks when the main issue is mobility, not cognition.
Why it matters
If you write support plans or fight for funding, SIS gives you numbers that hold up in meetings.
Swap your old ADL checklist for SIS and you get a truer snapshot of where help is really needed.
That single change can justify more hours, better job coaching, or stronger family supports.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run one SIS interview instead of your usual ADL form and note any new support hours it justifies.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
This study evaluated the potential of using the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS) for resource allocation for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) in Taiwan. SIS scores were compared with those obtained from three tools that are currently used in Taiwan for homecare services: the medical diagnosis issued by local authorities and two scales measuring Activities of Daily Life (ADL) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Life (IADL). Data were collected on 139 persons with ID aged 16 or older. The correlation between SIS subscales and the other three tools were calculated and compared. Six subscales of the SIS demonstrated adequate reliability and validity and had higher correlations with the IADL than the ADL and medical diagnosis. The results of these analyses suggest that the SIS can be used as a reference tool for resources allocation in this population in Taiwan.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2013 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.03.013