Appendix: A general guide to the appropriateness of some sample methodologies to varying situations and circumstances

The first four approaches from the community of practice concerned about normalisation teaching tradition:

Mixed fora.
Focuses service development on careful individual plans that specify the exact settings and supports a person would need to engage in functional and meaningful activity.
Seeks to establish detailed and technically-specific, weekly, daily and parts-of-day plans.
Seeks to balance participation in the planning process so that professional voices do not drown out the contributions of those who know and love a person.

Forum: the individual in the first instance - but a group of people is enlisted to develop ideas on how to make the individual’s dream a reality by building on opportunities and overcoming obstacles.
Focuses on key areas of the individual’s life, history, places they frequent, relationships, preferences, dreams and hopes.
Group members commit themselves to particular actions and set timeframes for these.
Useful in information gathering, describing present and future and deciding on what is good for and working in favour of the focus person.
Strong emphasis on profiling.
For a useful overview, see Mount, 1992.

Focuses on reviewing personal history and comparing and contrasting experiences with other populations, groups and individuals.
Useful in guiding service providers towards a deeper understanding of the focus person’s experience and thus building empathy.
Rooted in PASS.

Seeks to establish definition of service system capacities required to provide individualised supports.
Blends normalisation teaching perspective on gathering information and understanding people’s needs with an approach to individual needs assessment, the development of general service plans and case management.

Forum: individual and group of people who know, work with and like them.
Focuses on an individual’s history, dreams, nightmares and ideas, the things that best describe the individual and his or her gifts, strengths and talents.
Seeks to establish consensus opinion on where a person needs to go - and what everyone involved needs to do to improve a person’s life; then develop an action plan for getting there.
Useful in historical and current profiling and planning.
Has its origin in the 24-hour planning approach.
Historically highly procedural with specified steps. In practice, now evolving towards a more flexible approach based on general good mapping practice.

Draws directly from normalisation teaching community of practice.

Forum: a committed group of people.
Focuses on where the person is now and strengths of his or her support system – to be maintained. Clarifies dreams and works up an action plan.
Seeks to establish strategies for achieving valued futures when sustained and co-ordinated action is required.
Useful in establishing direction and goals for the person - and action plans to achieve goals identified.
8-step problem-solving approach.
ELP - Essential Lifestyle Planning (Michael Smull and Susan Burke Harrison, supporting people with severe reputations in the community):
Very detailed planning style.
Seeks to establish what is important to the person, what supports are available and getting a lifestyle that works for the focus person NOW.
Useful in information gathering, planning a service around a person to suit them and their needs and day-to-day action plan specification.
Good starting-point.
Useful in supporting transitions.
For an overview see NWTDT book.