'What do you think?': a qualitative approach to evaluating individual planning services.
Adults with ID value planning meetings only when they truly take part.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The author sat down with adults who have intellectual disability.
She asked them how they felt about their individual planning meetings.
She wrote down their words to see if the process felt useful or hollow.
What they found
People who could speak said they liked the meetings.
They understood the plan and felt it was theirs.
People who needed help to communicate were often left out.
Staff talked about them, not with them.
How this fits with other research
Fahmie et al. (2013) asked the same question in the Netherlands.
They also used interviews, but their adults felt ignored.
The difference may be how staff run the meeting, not the tool itself.
Vassos et al. (2016) and Claes et al. (2010) pooled many studies.
Both teams say the evidence is weak but points the same way: planning helps a little if you actually do it.
Torelli et al. (2023) tracked 22 000 adults and found the more personal the plan, the more control people felt.
Together the papers show the idea works, yet teams still skip the hard parts.
Why it matters
Your next plan meeting can include everyone.
Bring photos, tablets, or a friend who knows the person well.
Pause and ask, "Do you want to add anything?" even if it takes extra time.
That small move turns a paper exercise into real choice.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Start the meeting by asking the client a direct, open question and wait ten full seconds for any response.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
An established individual planning service was evaluated using a service-user-centred approach, which looked at the extent to which people are involved in the process and their understanding of its nature and function. Responses recorded during interviews with service users, their keyworkers and some family members are complemented with data collected from participant observation of individual planning meetings. The findings suggest that the majority of service users able to speak for themselves who were interviewed have a good understanding of the planning process and find it a positive experience; this is supported by participant observation data. Those speaking on behalf of people unable to speak for themselves are unclear as to how much understanding the group has of the process. Observation data suggest that people needing others to speak on their behalf are excluded from discussion during meetings more often than they are included. Recommendations are made for developing the service and providing additional support for keyworkers, building upon the considerable progress made during the service's inception.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 1997 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.1997.tb00701.x