From the Public Administration Times, The Newsletter of the American Society for Public Administration

       The second release on Community and Disability in the PA Times will be Deinstitutionalization and Long Term Services and Supports in the Community.  Together with the article, the author
http://patimes.pointsoftouch.com/community-disability-deinstitutionalization/ suggests the following inquires related to deinstitutionalization and long-term services and supports in your state and community: 

1.  In the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities, the goal of community living can be considered to be about half accomplished since the 1970s. What are the reasons for this stalling in institutional closures, and what can be done to move these closures and personal transitions forward at a faster pace?

2. During the past decade, the psychiatric or mental health field has developed education and training in the field of psychiatric rehabilitation. What other academic fields need to be strengthened to improve the community transitions related to the 1999 Olmstead Act?

3. The original critique of the continuum of services and structures has been addressed in part by movement to supportive living, family-directed services, person-centered support plans, personal assistance services, and related developments. What does your local service system look like today and how would you characterize it?

4. How are aggressive community treatment and community treatment orders related in the US? Who makes decisions about these orders, and what are the plans related to psychiatric centers and state clinics? Do they resemble involuntary care or commitment in any way?

5. Does your organization or group or association use the term long term services and supports? What services are covered through governmental payments for these services? Can you serve individuals still in the institution?

6. What do you think about the term "feeder programs"? Private providers are increasingly viewed as taking families and individuals out of community situations and moving into restricted, agency, building based programs. Do you think these criticisms are correct? If not, why not?