Balancing Individual Needs / Group Care in the ABI Waiver Program

Balancing Individual Needs and Group Care in the ABI Waiver Program

Imagine your life as an exciting, interesting story. Just like any other story, you'd want yours to be focused on you, with your needs and wishes taking center stage. That's the kind of care brain injury survivors should receive, but some people are worried that's not always the case.

Connecticut's ABI Waiver program was designed to help brain injury survivors move away from institutionalized care and into environments that better support their unique needs and recovery journey. The idea was to create a more personalized approach, respecting each person's preferences, capabilities, and aspirations.

However, recent concerns suggest that the reality might not be living up to the promise. Some participants, and their families, are worried that they're being directed towards group care settings, also known as supported day groups. These settings can feel a lot like the institutionalized care the ABI Waiver program was meant to replace.

The concern grows when people start wondering: "Who benefits more from this situation? Us, or the service providers?" After all, it could be more financially advantageous for service providers to operate group settings than to provide individualized, person-centered care. But that shift may not always be in the best interest of the brain injury survivors who need tailored support to recover and regain their independence.

So, what can we do to ensure brain injury survivors get the care they deserve?

First, let's ask ourselves some reflective questions: Are we advocating for the needs and wishes of brain injury survivors? Are we ensuring that their care environments are supportive rather than restrictive? Are we allowing financial interests to compromise the quality of care and recovery opportunities?

Once we have considered these questions, it's easier to imagine some possible solutions. For one, the implementation of the ABI Waiver program should be carefully monitored to make sure it stays true to its person-centered philosophy. There should also be increased transparency and accountability to prevent potential financial manipulations. Finally, brain injury survivors and their families should be empowered to voice their needs, preferences, and concerns.

In conclusion, while group care settings can provide valuable social interaction and routine, the shift towards this type of care within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups should not overshadow the fundamental principles of the ABI Waiver program: individualized care, personal growth, and the potential for recovery. Let's ensure that the story of each brain injury survivor's recovery remains person-centered, respectful, and empowering.

___________________________

Explore the ABI Waiver program in Connecticut and concerns about group care's potential institutionalization and financial bias over individualized care.

https://www.ctbraininjury.com/post/supported-groups

Connecticut, ABI Waiver program, brain injury survivors, institutionalized care, individualized care, person-centered care, group care settings, supported day groups, financial interests, service providers, transparency, accountability, potential manipulations, personal growth, recovery potential, care environments, supportive care, restrictive care, family concerns, participant preferences, participant needs, participant capabilities, participant aspirations, care quality, financial advantages, financial manipulations, care monitoring, program philosophy, voice of survivors, empowerment, social interaction, routine, respect, living groups, participant story, participant recovery, individual needs, group benefits, financial benefits, service benefits, program implementation, care balance, personal story, reflective questions, advocacy, needs assessment, wishes assessment, solution imagining, care shift, care philosophy, program accountability, survivor voice, potential harm, care services, care steering, long-term harm, financial steering, group operation, tailored support, independence, recovery journey, participant concerns, participant benefits, program benefits, transparency increase, accountability increase, recovery opportunities, participant advocacy, survivor advocacy, service advocacy, recovery environment, personal needs, financial compromise, quality compromise, recovery compromise, service quality, program quality, survivor needs, survivor wishes, survivor capabilities, survivor aspirations, survivor concerns, survivor benefits, program concerns, family advocacy, recovery support,

• What are the monitoring mechanisms in place in Connecticut brain injury supported living groups to prevent financial manipulation of the ABI Waiver and Money Follows the Person (MFP) programs' participants?

• How does Connecticut community care ensure that the principles of person-centered care are being upheld within their Connecticut brain injury supported living groups?

• Are there any safeguards in place within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups to prevent service providers from potentially exploiting these programs for financial gain?

• How does Connecticut community care ensure that the environments they provide within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups align with the desires and needs of program participants?

• Are there reports of participants in Connecticut brain injury supported living groups being placed into more institutional type environments contrary to their needs or wishes?

• How is the transition from individual care to group care settings being managed in Connecticut brain injury supported living groups, and are participants' desires being considered in this shift?

• How is Connecticut community care validating their belief in brain injury recovery and promoting the independence of the people they serve within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups?

• Are there any instances within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups where the person-centered care principle has been compromised for financial benefits?

• Are participants within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups being given a choice in the type of care they receive, whether it be person-centered care or group care settings?

• How can one identify and report potential financial manipulations in the ABI Waiver and MFP programs within Connecticut brain injury supported living groups?