These answers draw in part from “Invited Speaker: Collaboration through the Lens of Adult Services” by Lauren Ross, M.S. CCC-SLP, BCBA LBA (BehaviorLive), and extend it with peer-reviewed research from our library of 27,900+ ABA research articles. Clinical framing, BACB ethics code references, and cross-links below are synthesized by Behaviorist Book Club.
View the original presentation →The Therapeutic Consultation model is a service delivery framework used in Virginia to provide behavioral and therapeutic supports to adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities living in community-based settings. Under this model, professionals such as BCBAs and SLPs serve as consultants rather than direct service providers. They assess client needs, develop recommendations, train direct support professionals on implementation, and monitor outcomes over time. The model recognizes that adults in community settings need ongoing professional support but that the nature of that support is fundamentally consultative, requiring clear documentation, practical training materials, and systematic follow-up.
In pediatric settings, SLP-BCBA collaboration often occurs within direct service models where both professionals may be present during therapy sessions and can provide real-time feedback. In adult services, collaboration typically operates within consultative frameworks where neither professional provides extended direct therapy. Instead, both must translate their expertise into written protocols and training for direct support staff. Adults also present with longer learning histories, more entrenched behavioral patterns, and greater rights to self-determination, all of which require adapted collaborative approaches that prioritize client autonomy and feasibility across multiple living and working environments.
A BCBA should seek SLP collaboration whenever a functional behavior assessment reveals that challenging behavior serves a communicative function such as requesting items, escaping demands, or gaining attention in a client with limited communication skills. Additional indicators include situations where the client's current communication system is insufficient for their daily needs, when direct support staff report difficulty understanding the client's attempts to communicate, when the client is transitioning to a new communication modality such as an AAC device, or when behavioral interventions targeting communication-related behaviors have not produced expected outcomes despite adequate implementation fidelity.
Several provisions of the BACB Ethics Code (2022) support the need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Code 1.05 (Practicing within Scope of Competence) requires BCBAs to recognize when client needs exceed their training. Code 2.01 (Providing Effective Treatment) obligates BCBAs to ensure clients receive effective services, which may require input from other disciplines. Code 2.09 (Involving Clients and Stakeholders) emphasizes including relevant parties in treatment planning. Code 2.14 (Selecting, Designing, and Implementing Behavior-Change Interventions) requires evidence-based intervention selection, and for communication-related behaviors, the evidence often supports integrated approaches.
Aligning data collection requires identifying shared dependent variables and agreeing on operational definitions that work for both disciplines. For example, if both professionals are tracking functional communication responses, they should use the same definition of what counts as a successful response, the same measurement system such as frequency or percentage of opportunities, and the same data collection schedule. Creating a single integrated data sheet that captures both behavioral and communicative variables reduces the burden on direct support staff and ensures both professionals are working from identical information when making treatment decisions.
The primary barriers include siloed service delivery models where behavior analysis and speech-language pathology operate under separate contracts with different timelines and documentation systems. High turnover among direct support professionals undermines implementation fidelity for collaborative interventions. Scheduling constraints often prevent BCBAs and SLPs from conducting joint visits or attending shared team meetings. Differences in professional terminology and assessment frameworks can create miscommunication. Finally, funding structures may not support the additional time required for true collaboration, pushing professionals toward independent rather than integrated consultation.
FCT for adults must account for several factors that differ from pediatric applications. Adults may have physical limitations affecting their ability to use manual signs or operate certain AAC devices. Their cognitive profiles may influence the complexity of communication systems they can learn and maintain. Social contexts across multiple environments determine which communication modalities will be understood and reinforced by natural communication partners. Adults also have established preferences and long learning histories that influence their acceptance of new communication methods. Additionally, the right to self-determination means that adults should have meaningful input into which communication modality they prefer to use.
Direct support professionals are the primary implementers of collaborative intervention plans in adult services. They serve as the client's most consistent communication partners, data collectors, and the front line for monitoring behavioral and communicative progress. Their input during assessment provides essential ecological validity, and their feedback during implementation reveals practical barriers that consultants may not anticipate. Effective collaborative practice requires that both the BCBA and SLP invest in training direct support staff together, creating unified implementation guides, and establishing communication channels for staff to report concerns or ask questions about integrated protocols.
Organizations can support collaboration by scheduling overlapping consultation visits so that BCBAs and SLPs can conduct joint observations and team meetings. Creating shared electronic documentation systems allows both professionals to access and update the same client records. Establishing integrated team meeting structures that allocate time for collaborative case conceptualization rather than sequential discipline-specific reporting promotes genuine partnership. Funding models should account for the additional time required for coordination activities. Finally, organizational leadership should explicitly value and reinforce interdisciplinary collaboration as a quality indicator.
Professional disagreements should be addressed through structured, evidence-based discussion focused on client outcomes rather than disciplinary territory. Start by ensuring both professionals have a clear understanding of each other's assessment data and clinical reasoning. Identify specific points of disagreement and examine what evidence supports each position. When evidence is equivocal, consider implementing a brief data-based comparison of approaches with clear decision criteria established in advance. Code 2.01 of the BACB Ethics Code (2022) requires that treatment decisions prioritize client welfare, which should serve as the guiding principle. Documenting the decision-making process protects both professionals and ensures transparency.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Invited Speaker: Collaboration through the Lens of Adult Services — Lauren Ross · 1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $30
Take This Course →We extended these answers with research from our library — dig into the peer-reviewed studies behind the topic, in plain-English summaries written for BCBAs.
279 research articles with practitioner takeaways
258 research articles with practitioner takeaways
252 research articles with practitioner takeaways
1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $30 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
You earn CEUs from a dozen different places. Upload any certificate — from here, your employer, conferences, wherever — and always know exactly where you stand. Learning, Ethics, Supervision, all handled.
No credit card required. Cancel anytime.
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.