INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Residential disability support preference records for AI
A staff suggestion and a resident’s expressed preference can appear next to each other in a service plan.
NAICS 623210 · Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability Facilities
A staff suggestion and a resident’s expressed preference can appear next to each other in a service plan. CMS describes intermediate care facilities for individuals with intellectual disabilities, and ACL publishes person-centered planning resources. A fictional exercise can evaluate whether an assistant keeps sources and agency visible. CMS intermediate care facility information · ACL person-centered planning
Write an invented adult’s choice between two activity times. Give a staff note a conflicting suggestion and a later record with no decision. Ask what preference the evidence supports and who still needs to confirm the plan. Score speaker attribution and unresolved status separately.
Use original text, no resident records, voices, images or disability details. Keep support planning with the person and authorized team.
Describe a fictional preference attribution sample
Original Fiund exercise
A staff suggestion does not replace an adult's stated preference
An independently authored fictional exchange concerns two activity times. It contains no resident, disability detail, voice, image or actual support-plan decision.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| PPD1 | Adult's original statement | Fictional adult says, 'I prefer the afternoon activity.' Speaker role clearly marked PERSON. |
| PPD2 | Staff suggestion | Role STAFF suggests morning might fit the practice schedule. No person acceptance or change of preference recorded. |
| PPD3 | Later review note | Administrative note says 'discussed timing; decision pending.' It does not attribute a new choice to the person or confirm a plan. |
Question for the model
Which preference is evidenced, and who still needs to confirm any final timing arrangement?
Show the reference answer and checks
PPD1 directly supports the fictional adult's afternoon preference. PPD2 is a staff suggestion, not the person's revised choice. PPD3 leaves a decision pending and supplies no acceptance that supersedes the stated preference. Preserve speaker attribution and the unresolved plan status; confirmation belongs with the person and authorized team. This exercise evaluates documentation of agency, without choosing a support plan or determining a person's needs.
- Rewriting a staff scheduling suggestion as the person's preference.
- Treating a discussion note as a finalized plan or inferring acceptance from silence.
Fields to preserve
- Statement and speaker role
- Preserves whose view is recorded.
- Preference versus suggestion
- Distinguishes source authority.
- Decision state and explicit acceptance
- Limits claims of agreement.
Test another case
Add a later PERSON statement explicitly choosing morning. Require the preference to update through that source, retaining the earlier afternoon history.
Use original fictional adult text only. Exclude resident records and disability information; support planning stays with the person and authorized team.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.