To document supported decision making evidence and limits, report Davi's decision and authorship, information and communication access, options, supporters and their actions, authority, privacy, risk, practical outcome, raw counts, denominators, missingness, alternatives, and design limits. State the narrow interpretation, action owner, and reassessment trigger. Keep the conclusion tied to sampled decisions rather than converting support use into a global capacity judgment.

Lead with Davi's decision

State the practical question, Davi's priorities, assessment period, settings, contributors, qualified interpreter, consent route, assent when applicable, privacy boundaries, authority, and urgent actions.

Show evidence provenance

Present Davi's messages, information sources, option versions, access supports, supporter actions, authority records, risk evidence, missingness, corrections, and outcomes before conclusions.

Separate pathways

Keep direct decision, chosen support, clarification, trial, revision, decline, deferral, representative action, unresolved authority, urgent route, implementation, and person-rated fit distinct.

Report alternatives and limits

Discuss information access, communication, supporter availability, pressure, relationship, setting, timing, privacy, health, risk, observer effects, phase order, missing outcomes, and generalization.

Write a bounded action statement

Name what should change, who owns it, which evidence permits it, when it starts, how Davi will review it, and what event triggers reassessment.

Build Davi's supported decision-making evidence report

Create one versioned record for the community archive program. Include Davi's decision and authorship, information and option versions, communication access, supporters and actions, relationship and power, authority, privacy, credible risk, ordinary supports, eligible events, outcome, missingness, correction, change of mind, qualified owner, action rule, and reassessment trigger. Store purpose-needed information with role-limited access. Pair every conclusion with author, source, date, decision version, information and communication conditions, support actions, authority, unit, denominator, missingness, uncertainty, alternatives, and permitted next step.

Validate Davi's evidence

Reproduce 40 events, six access failures, four missing outcomes, 30 interpretable, 14 direct decisions, seven supported decisions, five deferrals, four unresolved, and 19/26 workable resolved or deferred pathways.

Connect Davi's evidence to an action

The report connects each finding to information repair, communication access, supporter selection, authority clarification, risk planning, implementation, or focused follow-up. Unresolved items keep an owner and age.

Work through Davi's example

Davi reviews 40 archive decisions. Six lack required access and four lack a usable outcome, leaving 30 interpretable events. Fourteen are decided directly, seven use chosen support, five are deferred, and four remain unresolved. Of the 26 resolved or deferred pathways, 19 receive a workable rating from Davi. Preserve the full decision cohort, prerequisites, support choices, authorship, authority, invalid events, open work, corrections, and outcomes. This fictional example demonstrates one assessment control. It supplies no diagnosis, legal-capacity finding, guardianship conclusion, consent authority, treatment effect, safety clearance, coverage result, or outcome guarantee for Davi.

Address Davi's main interpretation risk

Reporting 21 successful decisions would combine direct and supported authorship while omitting ten unavailable records. Reporting 19 of 26 capable decisions would turn Davi's fit rating into a legal or personal trait. Review communication, information, option quality, supporter access and conduct, power, privacy, health, risk, time, implementation, authority, client priorities, and design strength separately. Speed, memory, unsupported independence, agreement, confidence, eye contact, calm affect, or a favorable result cannot establish authorship, consent, capacity, safety, or support quality.

Keep Davi's clinical scope explicit

For Davi's supported decision-making evidence report, the CASP public summary supplies high-level ABA behavioral-health-treatment scope for autistic people, with licensed detail outside this page. The current BACB Ethics Code addresses competence, client and stakeholder involvement, consent and assent when applicable, assessment, risk, data, documentation, confidentiality, and evaluation for covered people. The BACB outline is examination content. These materials guide clinical practice within scope and do not create guardianship, consent, disclosure, payer, or emergency authority.

Protect Davi's communication access

ASHA's AAC portal says AAC users should always have access to their tools or devices. A 2026 systematic review of AAC research for autistic adults and children found heavy emphasis on requesting and variable study quality and generalization evidence. For Davi, preserve decision, question, uncertainty, refusal, correction, privacy, risk, and relationship messages across any effective form. Communication support should expand access while leaving authorship visible.

Use supported decision-making sources carefully for Davi

The federal Administration for Community Living describes supported decision-making as person-centered help tailored to particular decisions, with trusted people chosen by the individual while the individual retains control. The Justice Department's less-restrictive-options page describes arrangements ranging in formality and intensity and notes that some states have enacted agreement laws. These pages support Davi's person-chosen, decision-specific design. They provide general information rather than a state-specific legal determination.

Separate support from legal authority for Davi

The National Council on Disability's 2018 Beyond Guardianship report describes supported decision-making as an emerging, less-restrictive alternative in which people use trusted help to understand situations and choices while making their own decisions. The report also states that no singular model exists and calls for further study. For Davi, use it as policy context. Current state law, court orders, professional scope, privacy rules, and the exact legal act still require qualified review.

Preserve access, assent, and urgent routes for Davi

The Justice Department's effective-communication guidance directs covered entities to consider the nature, length, complexity, context, and person's usual communication method. Breaux and Smith propose individualized assent and withdrawal procedures in an evolving literature; their framework is practice guidance rather than a separate BACB rule. For danger or a medical emergency in the United States, SAMHSA directs people to call 911 or go to the nearest emergency room. Davi's routine assessment cannot delay emergency, protective, or mandated action.

Choose Davi's next bounded action

Davi reviews the summary, corrects two paraphrases, and removes unnecessary private detail. A new assessment starts only after a meaningful change in decision, access, support, authority, risk, or priority. Record the owner, evidence, effective date, decision and information version, support arrangement, authority, privacy and safety route, implementation check, accessible explanation, disagreement or complaint path, and reassessment trigger. Preserve the earlier record when the decision or conditions change.

Close Davi's assessment

Review the supported decision-making evidence report with Davi, the qualified clinician, chosen supporters, access owners, and specialists named in the manifest. Confirm that the person's decision, communication, supporter help, professional recommendation, representative authority, payer action, organizational decision, risk, and outcome remain distinct; every denominator is reproducible; communication, basic needs, prescribed care, refusal, privacy, change of mind, and safe exit remain protected; urgent needs received action; and conclusions stay bounded to the sampled decision. Keep this page draft and noindex until every required review is complete.

Related resources

Sources