Early intensive behavioral intervention: emergence of a consumer-driven service model.

Storm (2000) watched parents push school districts to fund early intensive ABA for preschoolers with autism.

The paper tells the story like a case study: moms and dads learned the science, formed groups, and demanded services.

It is not an experiment; it is a snapshot of a movement starting and the push-back it met.

Districts said “no” even when parents offered data.

Shortage of BCBAs, union rules, and tight budgets blocked rapid growth.

The author warns that parent power is real, so planners must ready staff and policy fixes now.

de la Cruz et al. (2025) pick up the same fight but hand BCBAs the playbook parents once had to write alone.

Saunders et al. (2005) widen the lens: the 2000 parent spark should scale to whole public-health systems, not just autism preschool rooms.

Storch et al. (2012) stretch the consumer-demand idea further, telling BCBAs to use the same parent-pressure tactics to open dementia and TBI markets before autism slots fill.

McGee et al. (2019) give the practical next step: run a behavioral-systems analysis first so district resistance does not repeat.

If you run or plan EIBI programs, expect parent requests to keep coming. Use the later papers: map your system variables, line up staff pipelines, and teach legislators before the next family fight lands on your desk.