Cortica ABA therapy program is using robots to ignore people's boundaries

So first, Niloufar Far of Cortica sent me three unsolicited e-mails within two weeks, including one containing the line, "I hope you take my persistence as a compliment."

Screenshot of e-mail reading: Niloufar Far <nfar@corticacare.com> Hello again! I hope you take my persistence as a compliment. We are still searching for a Licensed Mental Health Therapist who is passionate about supporting children and families navigating autism, ADHD, and related differences.

No, I don't take your persistence as a compliment! I don't have any illusions that you aren't sending your obsessive spam to every clinician whose information you have been able to locate. 

Today, I received an e-mail from Alexa Goodrich of Cortica, clearly written by a robot. It appears that this robot scanned my profile, pulled up certain keywords that don't have anything to do with the job, and wrote this bizarre message. Yes, my work with "low-cost virtual programs and community engagement" certainly aligns with their mission. What? 

Screenshot of LinkedIn message reading Hi Erika, I hope you’re doing well! I came across your profile and noticed your work in evaluations and consultations. It seems like you have a strong background in supporting queer youth, which is really impressive.I’m currently hiring for a part-time ABA Therapist position at Cortica in Quincy, Massachusetts. This role involves working with individuals in crisis, and I believe your experience could be a great match. Your work with low-cost virtual programs and community engagement aligns with our mission. If you’re open to it, I’d love to chat more about this opportunity. Let me know if you’re interested! Best regards, Alexa Alexa Goodrich Senior Talent Acquisition Associate @ Cortica

Once again, I will remind people that the headline of my LinkedIn profile is "recruiters please do not contact." You can't miss it. Well, unless you are a robot. Those generally discard language they have not been programmed to understand.

Screenshot of my reply, stating: Hi, thanks for your message. I'm curious; is there a reason your company uses robots to look for certain terms in profiles, but hasn't programmed them to look for clearly stated boundaries? My headline is "recruiters please do not contact" and the first line of my "about" section is "I do not provide ongoing individual or group therapy services at this time. Recruiters, please do not contact me with job offers for types of services I do not provide." I can only assume that your organization similarly ignores boundaries with clients, families, and collaterals. I will be keeping this in mind when making referrals in the future.

Those who have talked to me about such things (or read my blog) know that I like to remind folks that while I don't support the ABA Autism Industrial Complex, I am also aware that ABA is currently often the only way for families to pay for an aide for their child, or sometimes the only service that will include autistic kids in much programming, especially if they have Masshealth. Until it is abolished and replaced with more affirming services, we will have kids who need to receive some services through ABA and will need to find the least-problematic provider.

Cortica is clearly not in the running for this. They're stalking clinicians and using robots to ignore boundaries. I am assuming they are run by finance people, not people people, and they have decided it's a worthwhile risk to stalk and alienate clinicians in their community if it means they manage to fill a few more slots so they can make money. 

I can't imagine that a company run this way would have any sort of willingness or skills in collaborating with a child's other providers and their community supports. I imagine they've probably stalked most of these providers and sent them disjointed robot messages. As a professional, I of course attempt to communicate and collaborate with all of the professionals and community connections my clients provide me, as this is in the client's best interest. But I am first and foremost a human, and I'm not really sure how charitable and open-minded I am going to be when I inevitably need to contact someone from this organization. I certainly won't be referring anyone there unless there is some reason why it is only provider that will fulfill a particular need. 

Differences in experiences between neurodivergent folks diagnosed as young children and those diagnosed later

I am noticing that so many more of the clinicians and teachers I work with are getting their advice and information about autism and neurodivergence from those who are autistic or have related profiles, so this is really promising. (Physicians and state agencies: Most of you are not doing any of this, and when pressed seem completely unaware that learning about autism from autistics is a thing. Do better.)

A bit of an oversight I am noticing is that a lot of folks are failing to separate out the differences in experience between those diagnosed as young children and those diagnosed as teens or adults. Because of shifts in the way autism is diagnosed and understood, most of the people writing and presenting about their autistic experiences right now are Generation X and Y folks who did not realize they were autistic until recently. 

Those diagnosed later typically have had the experience in which they were constantly told they were naughty, lazy, rude, defiant, unfriendly -- and had no idea why this was happening or what to do to change this. They are now going through a process of undoing all of this and learning to be their best autistic self instead of a flawed neurotypical. However, among all this mistreatment and failure to see who they really were, these folks also had the upside of people around them having expectations of them, and correcting them (even if not in a helpful way) if they didn't meet these expectations. These folks grew up with society around them expecting they would work, attend college, date, marry, have children, and so forth. 

Folks who have always been labeled as disabled did not have this experience. People who have grown up labeled with a disability typically talk about people infantilizing them and having very low expectations of them, and of people operating under a belief that allowing a disabled person in the door is sufficiently including them. Rather than teaching disabled children to grow and excel in affirming ways, a majority of teachers and community leaders seem to approach them with the general view of "they can't help having poor skills" and fail to teach them very much. Adults who have grown up with disabilities often talk about learned helplessness and prompt dependence. People who have always been seen as disabled have the experience in which society views things like careers, families, sexuality as things that just don't apply to people like you. 

People diagnosed as young children also have the experience of being seen as public property. Everyone gets to have an opinion about how they're doing, everyone gets to give unsolicited advice. They get objectified -- people love having them in their programming, because they add diversity and everyone gets to feel good about tolerating them, but no one feels obligated to see them as whole people or actually ensure they are getting what they expect out of something. 

[Shared with enthusiastic permission]: My young adult child is autistic and has a number of obvious disabilities, most diagnosed in toddlerhood. When they were around 8 or 9, they attended a summer art museum camp for a week. Their 1:1 aide was not able to come on the first day (at the younger ages when staff directly supervise and assist all children, my child did not need an aide 100% of the time as they have later) so they attended that day without one. When I picked them up, the instructors gushed at how they had done so well, there were no issues at all, they were so good -- basically implying that they had expected an autistic child to be difficult and have "behavior problems" despite this not being remotely my child's profile and despite clear communication beforehand that most of their difficulty with group instruction is around slow processing and a tendency to be concerningly passive.

When I asked a few more questions of the staff and my child, I learned that the theme of the day had been portraits, the group had learned the difference between a portrait and a landscape and identified these in the galleries, and had made self-portraits using a mirror as well as portraits of a partner. My child had not touched any art materials and had just sat there throughout the art-making, and did not know any of the terminology that had been taught in the galleries -- they didn't understand any of what was going on, and no one had apparently approached them to get their attention, provide context, repeat the directions, show examples, and let them know what was expected and instruct them how to get started. 

When I attempted to address this, I was told "oh, that's completely fine!" -- because apparently the goal in the instructors' mind isn't for my child to learn anything at the art camp I am paying for and at which my child is spending time and energy, but rather is to make the staff feel good by thinking they included a disabled kid. Do you not think my child had any feelings about knowing they were supposed to do tasks and didn't know exactly what or how? And they say autistic people are the ones who are bad at perspective-taking. Fortunately their 1:1 aide attended the rest of the week and provided basic prompting and checking in that any adult who cared enough could have done, and they learned the other topics and created art as expected.

Similarly, I have a number of teen clients who have been diagnosed since they were young who irritatedly describe past experiences in which they realize in hindsight they were allowed to annoy people without being given any feedback, or that they participated in activities in which they were given no correction or instruction and just did them haphazardly without learning the skill that others were being taught. While late-diagnosed folks talk about the freeing experience of recognizing the option to unmask in certain situations, some of our folks who have grown up diagnosed were never even expected to learn basic universal social skills, let alone having the option of choosing to mask in certain situations for access or safety. 

My teens and young adults describe situations similar to my child's museum camp experience in which the leaders patted themselves on the back for how they were tolerating having a disabled child present (while completely failing to include them or have any expectations for them). They have also described experiences of disclosing their disabilities and accommodation needs and being dismissed by well-meaning people with low expectations ("no, I think your spatial skills are just fine!"). 

My autistic child had and continues to have instructors and providers who push back at our explanations that several of their skills are objectively very low, say that everything they have seen seems just fine and there is nothing they recommend they work to improve, yet will simultaneously say that "I don't think you'd be ready for that" or "that might be something to try when you are much older" regarding typical educational and community activities.

The advice from late-diagnosed autistics to focus on providing space for autistic people where just being there and being themself is sufficient makes perfect sense when we are working with people who have grown up constantly criticized and told they are not enough. This is generally my approach with late-diagnosed folks or folks exploring their neurodiversity.

We need to be careful with this approach with people who have grown up labeled as disabled and have faced low expectations throughout their lives. We need to remember that these folks typically experience some combination of learned helplessness and a tendency toward rising or falling in accordance with people's low expectations. Their experiences usually more typically mirror the experience of adults who have grown up with an obvious physical or sensory disability; there is ample writing and training available from adults regarding these experiences. If we apply advice from those who have had the very different experience of growing up undiagnosed to those who grew up diagnosed, it is likely we will replicate low expectations.

In some ways this work ends up being the exact opposite. I have had the experience of supporting an autistic adult in deciding they don't do unscheduled phone calls as the combination of auditory processing and a sudden unexpected routine change is too much, and would now be setting limits with colleagues that they need to be e-mailed/texted. I've done the same thing with people who have decided they would stop or decrease driving, step away from full-time work, or drop their self-imposed expectation that they actively date and try to find a life partner. With my clients who have been labeled all of their lives, the experience is often more that they've never been expected to make a phone call, drive, work, or date. The work here is providing them with the information to make an informed decision as to whether these are things they are capable of doing and interested in doing. Before we come to our autistic clients with "well autistic adults are saying to promote freedom to not mask, not work, not date, not socialize," we need to have a clear understanding as to whether this is someone who has grown up knowing these things are an option and has been provided the skills to attempt these things if they wish. 

LGBTQ Dungeons and Dragons group ages 8-12 starts tonight

Image: roleplaying dice and stones reading "magic" and "strength," lying on a six-color pride flag

• Groups meet weekly on Zoom for 90 minutes.
• Group is led by a clinician/educator along with a previously identified teen or young adult Dungeon Master. 
• Groups are open to anyone, anywhere in the world, as they are not therapy groups. Insurance cannot be billed for these groups.
• Any youth who identify as comfortable in LGBTQ space or wanting to explore LGBTQ space are welcome. Game play is LGBTQ affirming and youth tend to play as out queer characters. Youth will not typically be in the position of needing to discuss their personal identities except as they choose to. 
• Our social environment is neurodiversity affirming, learners tend to be neurodivergent, and we aim to be open and responsive to any stated or apparent needs. Communicating through text chat, voice, or a combo are all great. Facilitator employs a model of universal social skills in which youth receive explanations of social skills such as asking for consent before offering advice, understanding the difference between fact and opinion, using coping skills to handle disappointment. 
• Players should have basic familiarity with the game, such as watching others play or via YouTube. We are low-key and friendly and happy to help out players who don't have all of the rules of gameplay memorized. Beginners are very much welcome!
• Group is $10 per week, charged weekly. Sliding scale is available for those with financial need.

Ages 8-12

6:30-8:00 Mondays Eastern U.S. time 

Four weeks

• November 24
• December 1
• December 8
• December 15

Ages 13-17: a few groups are currently in progress and could potentially add a player, or can add folks to waitlist for next round

E-mail erika@erikashira.com for signup link. 

Providers: Don't forget to continue to document stable/lifelong disabilities

I am encountering documentation from a number of well-meaning providers who seem to be 100% following the social model of disability and the recovery model in their notes. Their notes focus entirely on what is important to the person and contain only positive comments.

While I very much support the overarching sentiment here, this type of documentation is not helpful, and can be harmful, when someone needs to document their disability for accommodations or benefits. I'm seeing notes for people who have significant functional deficits, but have figured out their life around these and aren't distressed by it, with absolutely no mention of these. I once completed an evaluation for a family with a teen who has some pretty significant support needs. As with most teens, this person stopped receiving any services around 10, as they had made all of the progress they were likely to make with communication, motor skills, and so forth. The documentation from these services was all framed positively and referred to the teen graduating from the services and having met all goals. The documentation from their ongoing medical providers reported they had graduated from these therapies without any further clarification. 

This teen was denied a number of case management and vocational support services, as the medical documentation indicated "doing great with everything."

Remember, most decisions around service eligibility are made by a someone who isn't a clinician, and if they are, they are usually a nurse or physician of a random specialty who isn't versed in developmental/rehab-type services. These people's viewpoint is usually that if someone wasn't doing expected things (working a typical job, independently taking care of household/community tasks, etc.), the ongoing providers would of course have documented this as a crisis and would have mandated intensive services to push those skills. 

My recommendation would be to ask the individual or family if they will be needing documentation at any point that documents their disabilities. If so, we might provide a periodic summary that lists what the person does not do or does with extensive accommodations, while keeping our notes in general focused on stability and quality of life when this is the case. I might write something more verbose that captures these dialectics, stating clearly that the person is unable to do X task due to Y conditions, though is fully able to meet their obligations by hiring people, living with someone, etc. We might also ask if the person finds it validating to have documentation that there are things they are unable to do; many disabled people are looking for this and find it helpful, provided it is done in a supportive manner. 

Also, remember that for minors, we need to be spelling out when functioning does not meet age norms. Most professionals who are not developmental folks (and certainly most non-clinicians who are determining eligibility) have no idea really how very early most skills occur in developmentally typical children. A number of non-normed checklist tools seem to operate on an idea that people are completely dependent for communication and self-care tasks until 18. Given how many children are carpooled and playdated thus not given opportunities for independence (yet have the motor and cognitive skills to easily learn these tasks if taught them), age norms are particularly important. If I state that a 10-year-old (who has had OT, whose parents have worked extensively on tasks due to the disabilities) is not independent with certain hygiene tasks, the child is likely to encounter gatekeepers whose thinking is that their most 10-year-olds cannot do those things. In this instance, it actually is more effective to use a normed ADL tool and state that hygiene skills are around an age equivalent of 5 years. If the child is using adaptive materials (checklists, color-coding, magnifying mirror, electric toothbrush, adaptive grips), I will state this, and the estimated age equivalent possible without adaptations. 

Additionally, we need to remember to ask about and document measures of functioning that are slightly outside of our usual area of focus, but aren't out of our scope. For instance, as LMHCs, while we might be seeing someone for anxiety around a specific issue, if they have an ongoing disability that means there are certain things they don't do, do with accomodations, or do differently than others, we should be documenting this. Reviewers are quick to note that our documentation did not mention that the person only travels with an aide when discussing anxiety in crowds, or takes paratransit to work when we discussed getting out the door on time. 

If we are working in settings that only require a comprehensive evaluation be done once (or don't really require it to be comprehensive), we need to make even more sure that our notes refer to things that haven't changed, but still aren't typical. Disabled folks will need to bring current records to school and work that document that they're still disabled. Professionals who are not developmental/rehabilitation folks don't understand that most skills for disabled folks don't change a whole lot after elementary school or so. I see reviewers saying that documentation described extremely impaired self-care abilities due to motor skills during an evaluation at 13, but the person is now 17 and isn't receiving services to work on motor skills, thus their inference is that the skills must be normal. 

I still have never figured out whether those checkoff lists for physical exams or mental status exams are looking for whether the item being assessed is typical, or is normal for the person. I can't tell you how many times I've seen physical exams that list an established diagnosis of hypotonia, then muscle tone is checked off as normal. Or vision is checked off as "normal" in a visually impaired person who presumably wasn't having double vision or any signs of acute problems. Some assessment forms used in community mental health (IYKYK) only have ways to indicate how much of a "problem" a particular skill area is.

I dealt with an issue in which a family had a youth who had been born with a limb difference, which hadn't been noted in any medical records other than at birth. The parents were high-functioning in terms of getting services they needed in place without involving their pediatrician, and the child and family had never raised any concerns about needing medical attention or assistance in getting accommodations for the limb difference. This doesn't seem like a problem on the face of it; no medical needs were present, and we should support body diversity, right? It did become quite a problem when something unrelated the child said was misinterpreted by a school staff member (a "my dad would kill me..." type comment), who decided to report to CPS that the child was being physically abused. CPS visited the home, found a child with a missing limb, requested medical records only from the pediatrician and not the specialists, and found that all of the physical exams listed "extremities: normal." 

Also, with a situation like this, while the Americans with Disabilities Act guidance discourages organizations from requiring documentation for accommodations when a disability is obvious, most places want "something on file." When they need to provide this documentation, this family should be able to download their child's last physical, which should list the limb difference and if the child uses any type of prosthetic.

Regardless, if we are going by "normal for the person," we need to put something in notes. If I'm seeing an autistic person who generally has a rather flat presentation that isn't concerning, I can check off "full range of affect" and "congruent facial expressions" if I am working somewhere that uses a prefabricated assessment, but then should put in notes "presentation is fairly flat at baseline, is nonconcerning, is appropriate for an autistic person." If I just check that it's normal, someone might review that note, meet the person, and deduce that it's new or unusual that they seem fairly flat. 

Remember, people in general are really ableist, and they expect that healthcare professionals especially share these worldviews. These people have a terrible time wrapping their minds around a note that describes someone as happy, healthy, and successful even when it does clearly spell out that the person does not walk or read. If we don't even document the things the person can't do, they will completely make up their mind that someone being described as stable and functional is obviously nondisabled. 

Disability nonprofits and other advocates: Stop promoting this idea that people should provide their own accommodations

I am getting quite frustrated with leading U.S. disability nonprofits platforming these parent-led initiatives that focus exclusively on parents providing their child's accommodations with absolutely no mention that this is to be a last resort when a program is not following the law and a family still wishes to be included. I'm seeing disability nonprofits posting on social media about parents spending extensive time modifying materials for extracurriculars and providing inservice trainings about their child's disability, and this is being promoted as normal and encouraged. I'm seeing things like "tips for success at summer camp for kids with [disability]" that focus on the parent providing all of the accommodations and modifications as well as the general staff training around disability, not just the training specific to their child's equipment and methods. 

Of course I am not going deny the reality that disabled folks and their friends and family frequently end up providing their own accommodations, nor am I going to suggest that any one individual should stop doing this in any particular situation. Of course people make the informed choice every day to provide their own accommodations so they can be included somewhere, and it would be ridiculous to suggest that someone forgo every service or experience just to make a point. All of us who have a less-common need or someone in our lives who does are all-too-familiar with the idea of "having a super low bar" and frequently settling for things that really aren't ideal. 

And of course it's a normal and natural part of interdependence that most disabled folks who go into a restaurant or museum with family or friends are going to have those people provide most of their accommodations such as reading things or reaching things rather than requesting that the staff do it. The point here of course is not that friends-and-family-as-accommodations is necessarily a bad thing. 

What's missing here though is that so many of these resources don't once mention that if you're in the U.S., and you're dealing with a business open to the public, the place most likely has to provide accommodations. There are only a few rare exceptions. Most businesses are not aware of these obligations, and frequently will ask someone to bring their own accommodations. They e-mail back someone stating they need to communicate in writing and say their business only uses the phone for that ("you'll need to have someone make the call for you then"). They state they don't have screen-reader-accessible versions of the forms they haven't updated in 20 years ("someone can help you fill it out"). 

The other thing with the ADA is that enforcement is difficult. In most cases, what people do is go somewhere else or provide their own accommodations. I don't begrudge anyone for not formally pursuing ADA violations. 

However, I also am a behavior science person. I can tell you with a high degree of certainty that most people are not in the habit of just doing whatever the hell they want until someone in authority stops them. Most people overall want to do what's good and helpful and prosocial, but also tend to do what's normative and what's been modeled for them.

If someone works at a summer camp and their experience is that disabled kids have their parents provide all the accommodations and train their staff, they have no reason to understand that this is unjust and shouldn't be happening. There is no reason most people would know that the ADA obligates any public place to spend some degree of time and money to put accommodations in place -- even if they looked at most of the ADA materials put in place by the government and nonprofits, these are mostly about structural access requirements and they're going to believe that the ADA only tells places to have wheelchair ramps and lowered water fountains. When a parent comes in and makes a request under the ADA to have the camp provide a low-cost or no-cost accommodation such as having their staff watch some YouTube videos about accommodating the disability and providing large-print materials, this may be the first time the camp director has had anyone make this type of request, and the camp director may in good faith tell the parent that that sort of thing is provided by parents. If the camp director follows disability organizations on social media and is seeing them post content about parents modifying the materials for summer camp with no mention that the camp is obligated to do this...ugh. 

So again, in this situation I wouldn't begrudge the parent who makes the materials and sends their own aide for a weeklong day camp on their child's favorite topic rather than not attending or attending but being excluded. As much as I know that people often end up providing their own accommodations, I do absolutely encourage parents to initially send in ADA letters stating what is needed and reminding the organization of their obligations, and to model this human right for their children. I encourage families to push this to whatever extent is safe for their family -- especially when dealing with a well-funded organization with a high degree of community exposure -- by doing things such as contacting their regional ADA Technical Assistance organization and forwarding the e-mails clarifying what the organization's obligations are.

If you see these posts, please do some advocacy by leaving them a polite comment that they need to remind parents that summer camps, sports teams, music schools, YMCAs, etc. (basically everywhere except for religious organizations performing religious functions) are covered under Title III of the ADA, and they should be providing these accommodations. 

New sections of LGBTQ youth groups have opened -- no waitlist!

Alt: heavily edited photo of rainbow umbrellas and banners at a pride parade

weekly Zoom groups for LGBTQ youth 8-18 

open to folks located anywhere in the world

$10 per week

not insurance eligible/not a therapeutic group

erika @ erikashira . com if interested

This is not a therapy group, so it is open to folks located anywhere. Group members tend to be mostly neurodivergent, a mix of about 2/3 homeschoolers and 1/3 not. We mostly free chat about whatever the group wants, whether that's queer topics, personal updates, hobbies, current events, or really anything else. As these are not therapy groups, members and facilitator can provide general support and suggestions for dealing with queer-related exploration, learning issues, mental health issues, and so forth, but I cannot provide tailored medical advice as I might in a therapy group. Members often bring photos/videos/etc. to share as well, whether their own creations or just things they enjoyed and thought others might like. When people are interested, we sometimes play games (always free-to-play online games that do not require any particular hardware or software, like Garticphone or Jackbox). 

We are completely flexible regarding participation with camera/mic on or off, chat box only, or switching it up depending on comfort level. For safety, I do need members to initially verify on camera that they are the same person each time and appear to be roughly in the correct age range. As members tend to be neurodivergent, I try to provide predictability and clear feedback. Particularly if we are playing a game or doing an activity, I let people know clearly for instance whether I expect hand-raising. During interactions, I promote universal social skills -- boundaries, consent, perspective-taking, inclusion, clear communication, self-advocacy, manners, etc. -- but I do not believe in promoting neurotypical communication styles or white/Anglo communication styles over other equally valid communication styles. Youth and parents are very much welcome to let me know if youth have particular types of accommodations or preferred feedback styles that are helpful. 

10/19/25: These groups typically have a long waitlist, but I opened two new sections to clean up the waitlist and accommodate people wanting to move to other times, so there is availability. 

Groups with current open slots:

• Wednesday 5pm Eastern U.S. time ages 13-18
• Thursday 6pm Eastern U.S. time ages 13-18
• Thursday 7pm Eastern U.S. time ages 8-12
• Sunday 4pm Eastern U.S. time ages 13-18

Folks are also welcome to join the waitlist for any other slots. erika @ erikashira . com

We also run LGBTQ Dungeons and Dragons campaigns and LGBTQ book groups with a similar flavor, but with a specific focus -- e-mail for more info. 

Grow Therapy recruiters don't read profiles and don't respect boundaries

Emma Beachy of Grow Therapy has sent me multiple e-mails to the contact info harvested off of LinkedIn (I am using different e-mail addresses for LinkedIn, insurance credentialing, NPI/CAQH, etc. so as to enable me to track such things).

My LinkedIn profile states I do not provide therapy and am not interested in hearing from recruiters. These recruiters are just harvesting profiles that contain certain credentials and are not reading the profiles at all. At least this one doesn't say they read my profile and are sure I would be perfect for their practice! 

I probably wouldn't have posted this one, since it's minimally obnoxious as far as recruiter spamming goes and I get that people gotta make the money and pay the bills, except this person also located a phone number for my practice, which is a bit of a chore to track down. I discovered today that several weeks ago they left a voice message on a mailbox that clearly states it is an information-only line, messages will not be returned, and directs people how to reach me via my website. The service I use unfortunately does not have an option for a true outgoing-only message, so I periodically discover people have left messages that do not acknowledge the outgoing message whatsoever and just say to call them back.

If you are any type of mental health business, you really should be doing better at respecting people's stated boundaries. Also, do you know how many clients I have who absolutely cannot do voice calls due to hearing or other disabilities, who have this stated on their voicemail along with how to text or e-mail them, and who also have people leave messages that just say they need to call back? And how many of the people who do this are healthcare providers? We gotta do better.

(BTW, I do have a line with monitored voicemail that I can give out to the very infrequent client or caregiver who does best with voice calls. But I overwhelmingly find that: 1. People of all ages and disabilities prefer texting/e-mailing for scheduling and reminders and 2. Large healthcare providers in particular seem to be stuck on voice calls as the only way to reach people, which is ironic, since they also are seeing people all day and wouldn't be able to pick up a call.)

 

Screenshot of e-mail from emma.beachy@growtherapy.com, which says: Hey Erika​, Providers we work with share that gaining new clients is their biggest headache when growing their private practice. In Massachusetts alone, providers averaged 7 new intakes from our marketing efforts last month! But growth isn’t just about referrals— it’s about ensuring clients have the coverage to access care consistently. I’d love to share more about Grow’s mission and how we’re helping increase access to mental health services! Would you be open to a quick call? Feel free to find time on my calendar