How to Administer the Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services
Published PDC-HS methods are all over the map—lock in your own script and share it.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Goldman and team read every paper that used the Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services.
They looked for how researchers gave the checklist, who they asked, and what steps they followed.
Out of dozens of studies, no two described the exact same way to run it.
What they found
Half the papers left out who filled out the form.
One third never said how long the interview took.
Only a few listed the order of the 12 questions.
The authors say the field needs one clear recipe everyone can copy.
How this fits with other research
Feldman et al. (1999) ran into the same mess years ago. Their autism screening review also found every team used different steps.
Tullis et al. (2019) pushed for tight preference-assessment rules in transition plans. Their call matches Goldman’s plea: write the steps so others can repeat them.
Ouyang et al. (2024) shows the flip side. Their big meta-analysis of parent training worked because each trial spelled out the coach script. Clear steps let them pool data across 32 studies.
Why it matters
If you use the PDC-HS, pick one way to give it and stick to it. Write the script in your behavior plan. Note who answers, how long it takes, and the order you ask. Your data will line up with the next BCBA and build a case for good staff support.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Draft a one-page PDC-HS script that lists question order, who you interview, and the time limit—then date and file it.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Performance Diagnostic Checklist-Human Services (PDC-HS) is a performance analysis tool used to identify barriers to performance in human-service settings. Multiple published studies have used the PDC-HS to determine effective interventions (Wilder et al. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 53(2), 1170–1176, 2020). However, in a recent discussion article proposing guidelines for administering the PDC-HS, Brand et al. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1–7 (2022) noted that procedural descriptions provided for administering the PDC-HS are somewhat ambiguous in the published literature. The purpose of the current systematic review was to compare methods used to administer the PDC-HS. Fifteen articles met inclusion criteria and were coded to evaluate commonalities among PDC-HS components. Authors generally agreed on how the outcomes of the PDC-HS were depicted and discussed but varied in their descriptions of methods used to administer the PDC-HS. Results are discussed in terms of the importance of technological descriptions and directions for future research towards the development of a more standardized tool. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40617-023-00848-3.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2024 · doi:10.1007/s40617-023-00848-3