2. Virginia’s Newest Opportunity: Improve Quality of Life & Support More People Through the Settlement James W. Conroy, Ph.D. The Center for Outcome Analysis www.eoutcome.org

3. Today’s Outline 4 1. History & Trends - Deinstitutionalization 4 2. Personal Journey 4 3. The Science: –How do we know people are better off? 4 4. Economy of Scale Concepts 4 5. Virginia’s great opportunity –Better lives for 1000s of people –Better results for each public dollar –Need: Independent, Individualized, Annual, Quality of Life Tracking System –To keep the system honest and convince any skeptics

4. Very Big – Versus Small “Institution versus Community” 4 This is a settled issue – Pennhurst Study et seq. 4 Media, scandals, courts, Olmstead decision 4 Institutions have declined 4 Community options are preferred in every way

5. Source of The Institutional Model 4 Brought to the U.S. in 1848 4 By Samuel Gridley Howe 4 From a “model program” in Germany 4 The vision was a self- sufficient agrarian community 4 Free from pressures of normal life 4 Protected, safe, healthy 4 Massachusetts School for Idiotic Children (Fernald)

6. By 1866, Howe Said This: 4 “… all such institutions are unnatural, undesirable, and very liable to abuse. 4 We should have as few of them as is possible, and those few should be kept as small as possible.” 4 Such persons [with disabilities]... should be kept diffused among sound and normal persons.

7. Regimentation 1915

8. And This (In 1866!): 4 “… all such institutions are unnatural, undesirable, and very liable to abuse. 4 We should have as few of them as is possible, and those few should be kept as small as possible.” 4 Such persons [with disabilities]... should be kept diffused among sound and normal persons.

10. And Finally (in 1866!): 4 I would take heed, however, against multiplying them unnecessarily. 4 I would keep them as small as I could. 4 I would take the most stringent measurements for guarding against those undesirable effect 4 and for dispensing with as many of them as may be possible.

11. Skewed Values in America 4 1969: The average cost per person at Pennhurst was $5.90 per day 4 The average cost of keeping a leopard at the Philadelphia zoo was $7.15 per day 4 Was this the Economy of Scale thinking at work?

12. Institutional Decline, Community Rise

14. Movement from Institution to Community From large, segregated, historically state of the art settings To small, integrated, more recent models of what a “home” means

15. For 100+ Years, What Did America Do With People Like Mike? 4 Diagnose him 4 Exclude him from school 4 Tell his parents that he needed medical care 4 That he could never learn and would bring no joy to the family 4 That he needed to live in a large facility

16. Why Did Parents Do This? 4 Because professionals told them to 4 Primarily doctors 4 Doctors had authority 4 Knew “what’s best” 4 With the best intentions

17. Acceptance of the Institutional Model 4 First publicly funded facilities --- 4 1848 Fernald Center, Massachusetts 4 1849 Dorothea Dix Center, North Carolina 4 1849 California Prison Ship, San Francisco Bay – 30 inmates – Stockton 1851

18. We Did Not Stop There 4W4We adopted and spread the “eugenics scare” period of human history 4141880-1920 4A4America decided “These people are inferior” 4T4They cannot be permitted to breed 4T4They should be isolated from society for that and other reasons

19. America’s Sad History in the Disability Field 4 America’s great judge, Oliver Wendell Holmes, was the source of many of these ideas 4 As we all know, the writings of Holmes were later used extensively by the Nazis 4 At this time in U.S. history, the facilities were named things like “Pennhurst Home for the Segregation of the Feeble Minded and Epileptic”

21. “This Is Where I Came In” 4 A personal note 4 1970, just out of University 4 No idea what to do with a degree in Physiological Psychology 4 Got a strange job by pure chance 4 Working on a national survey of people with “developmental disabilities” 4 Right at the national peak of institutions

22. The Pennhurst Longitudinal Study 4 Began in 1979 4 Largest such study ever done 4 Tracked 1,154 people 4 Visited every person every year 4 Surveyed every family every year 4 Measured qualities of life and satisfaction and costs 4 (This process still continues in 2007)

23. Purposes of Pennhurst Longitudinal Study 4 Track 1,154 people 4 Are these people better off? 4 In what way(s)? 4 How much? 4 At what cost? 4 What problems and deficiencies can be detected and addressed?

24. Aspects of Quality of Life 4 power to make one’s own life choices (self determination) 4 skill development 4 emotional adjustment 4 challenging behavior 4 attitudes and experience of caregivers 4 health 4 use of medications 4 earnings 4 hours per week of productive activity 4 relationships 4 family contacts 4 financial interest in the home 4 satisfaction 4 individual wishes, and ambitions 4 home environment 4 family/next friend opinions and satisfaction 4 integration 4 individual planning process

25. What Kind of People? 4 Average age 39 years at the beginning of the study 4 Had lived at Pennhurst an average of 24 years 4 64% male 4 33% had seizures 4 13% blind 4 4% deaf 4 18% unable to walk 4 50% nonverbal 4 47% less than fully toilet trained 4 40% reported to be violent at times 4 86% “severe or profound”

26. Pennhurst Class Members: Adaptive Behavior Development

27. Pennhurst Class Members: Improved Self-Control of Challenging Behavior

28. Pennhurst: Strong Initial Family Resistance to Community Idea

29. Pennhurst: 1991 Community Family Satisfaction

30. Different Question: Has Your Relative’s General Happiness Changed Since Moving?”

31. What Kind of People Made the Largest Proportional Gains?

32. Pennhurst Mortality

33. Pennhurst Costs Study, 1982

34. Did the Pennhurst Results Meet the Scientific Test of Replication? 4 Yes, 1356 people in Connecticut 4 Yes, 1000 people in Oklahoma 4 Yes, 400 people in New Hampshire 4 Yes, 1100 people in North Carolina 4 Yes, 200 people in Kansas 4 Yes, 400 people in Illinois 4 Yes, 2400 people in California

35. Now We Have Followed More Than 7,000 People 4A4As they moved out of institutions 4I4Into regular homes in communities 4O4Other researchers have gotten the same results 4A4Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, France, Sweden, etc.

36. Movement from Institution to Community From large, segregated, historically state of the art settings To small, integrated, more recent models of what a “home” means

37. Questions? 4 What is the status of state institutions in your state and the prognosis for the future? 4 Poll: How many states are now free of state institutions for people with intellectual & developmental disabilities? 4 Poll: In what year will the last public institution close?

38. Economics 4 The notion of “Economy of Scale” 4 Would seem to imply that larger settings would cost less per person 4 But how do we explain $$$ of institutions? –The epitome of “assembly line” thinking –Actually cost the MOST –The most costly human service EVER > $200,000 4 Is there such a thing as “Diseconomy of Scale?” 4 Yes

39. Economy of Scale 1: Larger Organization, Lower Cost Per Unit

40. Economy of Scale 2: Diminishing Returns

41. Economy of Scale 3: Diseconomy of Scale

42. Economy of Scale 4 Large institutions are the highest cost –National average now over $200,000/person 4 Institutions must be above the point of diminishing returns 4 Where is the “tipping point” within community settings? 4 When we consider homes size 1 to 10? 4 What is the ‘best size’? (On the average)

43. Scientific Literature: Sociology 4 (Slater’s classic – ideal size 5 – never too big, never too small)

44. Scientific Literature: Organizational & Industrial Psychology 4 (Little known scientific questioning of entire “Economy of Scale” assumption) 4 (Misapplication of industrial production models to human service systems)

45. Tug of War & Individual Effort 4 Kohler, back in 1927 4 Measured Tug of War games by # of players 4 Up to size 12 4 Extra person did NOT add full strength 4 Each new person pulled 10% less energetically 4 “Free Ride” phenomenon in groups

46. Cost: Economy of Scale Idea 4 In economics, EFFICIENCY (production of quality, salable products) increases with size (modern doubts) 4 Human services quality product = better quality of life 4 When size gets above 6, quality drops 4 So we try to fix it by adding staff 4 Then the larger settings get more costly 4 But the outcomes do not improve 4 Because the extra staff interact more with EACH OTHER and NOT with the people in the home

48. PA 1992: Per Diem Cost x Size

49. Did People with More Severe Disabilities Really Cost Much More in the Community?

50. What Size Is Best? 4 We do have a lot of evidence 4 Size studies published by Conroy 2011 4 A few examples

51. Progress in Independent Functioning by Size of Home: 2200 People in Oklahoma, US 1990-1996 (100 point scale) -0.4

52. Loneliness – Negative Reponses National Core Indicators 2008, N=1580

53. Like Home? Negative Responses National Core Indicators, 2008, N=1661

54. Choice & Self-Determination National Core Indicators 2006

55. Human Economy of Scale 4 Younger = More need for individual attention 4 Severe disabilities = More need for individual attention 4 Smaller home = More individual attention 4 More individual attention = better development 4 Small  4 More Individual Attention  4 Better Outcomes 4 Break point: around 6 – above 6 we get bad outcomes 4 Best outcomes 1 to 4 4 Book to read –Small is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered

56. Good or Bad Social Policy? Probably the most successful American “social experiment” of the Boomer generation

57. “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.” Winston Churchill

58. Virginia’s Time for Change is NOW YearCenterSize 2009 2014Southside Virginia Training Center (SVTC) Closes 254 2015Northern Virginia Training Center (NVTC) Closes 172 2016 0 2017 0 2018Southwestern Virginia Training Center (SWVTC) Closes 156 2019 0 2020Central Virginia Training Center (CVTC) Closes 490 1072

59. Virginia Will Really Need Evidence: A Cost/OutcomeTracking Project 4 An independent scientific assessment 4 “Are people better off” after leaving? 4 Independent 4 Annual 4 Every person, every year, face to face 4 Qualities of life, services & supports, costs, family surveys 4 Every year, with scientific confidence, we can tell all stakeholders – Are people better off, in what way(s), at what cost?

60. Thank You – And Good Luck!

61. Q & A Center for Outcome Analysis Havertown, PA www.eoutcome.org jconrocoa@gmail.com 610.668.9001