Market research

Editorial approval scope: The team checked current source fidelity, scope boundaries, dates, arithmetic, reader usefulness, practical workflow, and general-information limitations.

Start with a decision question

“Is there demand?” is too broad. A useful question names the service, population, setting, geography, payer or financial route, operating period, and decision. For example: “Should the practice develop a weekday center-based assessment service for school-age children in these three counties next year?”

Write the decision criteria before collecting evidence. Name who can approve clinical, legal, payer, workforce, facility, finance, and access gates.

Combine several evidence types

The SBA market-research guide suggests examining demand, market size, location, saturation, pricing, and competitor strengths and weaknesses. An ABA market study should add:

• direct input from autistic people, families, referral partners, and community groups
• population and geography, with data date and limitations
• licensure, entity, facility, professional, modality, and setting authority
• payer products, networks, enrollment, authorization, and self-pay routes
• qualified workforce, supervision, schedules, travel, and language capacity
• accessibility, transportation, technology, and communication supports
• real competitor services, openings, waitlists, hours, and referral patterns
• startup cost, working capital, reimbursement timing, and downside scenarios

No single source answers the whole decision.

Public data provides context

Census data can inform population, age, language, disability, income, commuting, and business context. Record the table, geography, survey or program, release, estimate, margin of error when supplied, and extraction date. Estimates from different years or geographies should not be combined casually.

The HRSA health-workforce portal provides workforce-related datasets and tools. Its profession categories and dates may not map neatly to ABA roles. Use current licensing boards, credential sources, job-market evidence, and direct recruiting tests to supplement it.

Public counts reveal population context rather than treatment need, eligibility, willingness, payer coverage, or available staff. Avoid turning a diagnosis prevalence estimate into a client forecast.

Direct research reveals lived conditions

Interview people with varied communication, service, and access experiences. Offer accessible formats, interpreters, AAC, privacy, and fair participation arrangements where appropriate. Ask about goals, barriers, travel, hours, settings, cost uncertainty, prior experiences, and desired alternatives.

Referral partners can explain handoff friction. Staff candidates can clarify commuting, schedule, supervision, and compensation realities. Payers and regulators can confirm current operational requirements through documented sources.

Use structured questions and record who was invited, who participated, and whose perspective remains missing. A convenience sample should never be presented as the whole community.

Keep interview notes separate from population estimates and verified requirements.

Competitor research needs a fair method

Compare services, locations, hours, settings, published eligibility, accessibility, contact routes, and publicly stated payer relationships. Date every observation. Directory entries and websites may be stale, so verify material facts with primary sources.

Respect access controls, copyright, platform rules, and confidentiality. Avoid impersonation or requests for protected information. Competitive analysis should identify gaps and alternatives rather than rationalize copied claims.

A fictional decision worksheet

Riverbend ABA, a fictional practice, defines five release gates for a proposed county: legal authority, payer route, qualified staffing, accessible site, and six-month liquidity. Each gate requires current written evidence.

At the first review, legal authority, site access, and liquidity clear. Payer contracting remains pending, and the recruiting test fills only two of four required roles. Gate completeness is 3 of 5. The practice records two holds and makes no launch promise.

Separately, 24 invited community participants complete 18 accessible interviews. Twelve of those 18 identify evening availability as important, and 10 identify transportation as a barrier. The practice reports 18 of 24 participation, 12 of 18 evening preference, and 10 of 18 transportation barrier. It does not generalize these counts beyond the invited group.

Translate research into scenarios

Build base, downside, and severe scenarios using explicit assumptions for eligible inquiries, conversion, authorization, staffing, cancellations, service mix, reimbursement timing, collections, and costs. Stress each constraint independently.

Keep market size, serviceable market, obtainable capacity, and financial break-even distinct. A large community need can coexist with a blocked launch because the practice lacks authority, qualified staff, accessible space, or sustainable funding.

Keep a living evidence register

For every fact, retain source, date, geography, population, definition, limitation, owner, and refresh trigger. Mark assumptions and interviews separately from verified rules. Record decisions and the evidence version used.

Refresh when payers, laws, licenses, facilities, workforce, population data, competitor availability, or practice strategy changes. Market research supports an accountable decision; it never guarantees demand or success.

End the study with a decision memo that names the chosen option, rejected alternatives, unresolved evidence, risk owner, validation milestone, and stop condition. A pilot might proceed only after licensing, payer, staffing, and accessibility gates are verified. Reopen the decision when an assumption crosses its prewritten tolerance.