necessary to move to a full range of regular housing and support options from the current facility-based service design in comparison to modifying the current small apartment/home structures such as those in Connecticut. To date, there is no evidence of this type of systems transformation in the US (as of 2012)though we have moved to reporting on homes of one's own, personal assistance services and supportive living approaches, including over 189,000 participants of the latter two categories. In 2013, Robert Agranoff reported in the "Public Administration Review", that leading state systems in the US (in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities) indicated an 80-90% conversion from a large institutional system to small, dispersed community homes and services in the community. These changes were based on efforts in states which involved major organizational changes in the NGO (non-profit agency) sectors (e.g., Fratangelo, 1994), and with variability in state government public policies, departments and financing (e.g., Braddock, Hemp & Rizzolo, 2008). Community support standards in the US Supportive living in the US is an important movement within the context of decades of federal policies, sometimes reluctantly, for community support services in communities nationwide as part of community integration, community participation, independent living and inclusion. This movement has been accompanied by a strong emphasis on self-determination, with roots in rehabilitation in the 1950s and also, in education in the 2000s. In the 1990s, this movement emphasized the skill standards of personnel, including direct service workers who were called "human service workers" and their "community managers" (2013, Department of Labor statistics). Increasingly, in 2013 with the consumer-directed services developed in these fields, education and training standards are being revamped within the context of the new US Direct Support Workforce and the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare. Community living The term community living was an outgrowth of the development of "residential services" in the communities in the US (e.g., Wolfensberger, Racino, Bersani, Nisbet, Taylor, and Bogdan of Syracuse University, Graduate Studies in Education, 600), and a departure from the development of institutional facilities. As part of this development and growth, different typologies of these services occurred beginning with group homes, staffed apartments, foster care, and then a variety of new and innovative services such as early intervention, family support services, supportive living and "related services" (e.g., supported employment, supported housing). Today, community living may involve over 43 residential typologies (e.g., Pynoos, Feldman & Ahrens, 2004), including board