Assessments

The provincial IBI program in Ontario likes to use two measures of progress - Adaptive Behaviour, like the Vineland II test, and IQ tests, such as the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI).  Some parents do not care particularly about these measures, particularly the IQ test.  IQ is notoriously difficult to measure for autistic individuals due to the nature of autism:  communication is impaired so it is difficult for the individual to explain what they truly know.


If you live in Ontario and have a child with autism, you need to care about these instruments.  In particular, the Vineland II measures "adaptive" functioning.  This is basically a test to measure how well your child functions in life as compared to children their own age.  When used in an IBI program, it can typically be used to determine a child's "trajectory".  For example, in a six month period, is a child in IBI progressing at least six months in development for each domain?  If so, they are falling no further behind but not catching up either.  Failure to show enough improvement at the right rate results in the conclusion that the child's "development trajectory" is not being changed by IBI and results in a quick discharge thereafter.


The theory of intensive ABA (or IBI in Ontario) is that your child should be showing clinically significant gains across most domains or it is not effective (read:  not worth spending $60,000 per year of taxpayer money).  However, interestingly a 2006 study based on the autism program in Ontario found that all children, even those who were still progressing slowly, doubled their rate of development while in IBI.  From the study:

Rate of Development. As noted above, children were quite variable but, on average, were substantially delayed developmentally prior to the program. In fact, they had been developing at about one-third of the rate of a typically developing child. Children's rate of development (based on the Vineland age equivalent scores) during IBI was approximately double their rate prior to IBI, and this was true for all three initial subgroups, i.e., even the lower functioning children doubled their rate of development, as a group. This suggests that the developmental trajectory of children was altered during their participation in the IBI program. Many children were even developing at a typical rate (although they may not have "caught up" to typical peers).

So if you are parent of child in IBI, or waiting for IBI - pay attention to this test.  It is used to make clinical decisions on your child's continued progression in IBI.