Abstract
Because many large, state-owned Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals With Intellectual Disabilities (ICF/IIDs) have closed or downsized, their average size has fallen markedly, as has the number that are publicly owned. We probe the relationship between ownership type and four measures of care quality in ICF/IIDs. Data on deficiency citations suggest that for-profits underperform other ownership types, although data on complaints show no clear pattern. Meanwhile, data on staffing ratios and restrictive behavior management practices, based mostly on facility self-reports, generally tell the opposite story. Our results lend some credence to concerns regarding inadequate care in for-profit ICF/IIDs, while underscoring the importance of requiring ICF/IID operators to report more comprehensive, longitudinal data that are less prone to error and reporting bias.