The research is settled. The math is clear. The only thing missing is the political will to let the private sector build what the state cannot afford to. Front Porch Cohousing is not asking for permission. We are building the model.
The Pennhurst Longitudinal Study did not prove that 3-person group homes work. It proved something more fundamental: the more a setting resembles a real home, the better people do. Smaller settings produced better outcomes than larger ones. More normalized settings produced better outcomes than institutional ones. More permanent settings produced better outcomes than transitional ones.
There is no setting more permanent, more normalized, or more integrated into community life than owning your own home. The research pointed directly at homeownership as the logical endpoint of deinstitutionalization. Pennsylvania's regulatory response pointed in the opposite direction.
Private equity and homeowner ownership can retire the state's $44 million per-person lifetime liability for a fraction of the cost of the current system — without a single dollar of new state spending. Here is the logic:
A resident who owns their home has a capital asset that appreciates over time. The state's current model produces zero equity for the resident and zero return for the state.
Private investors and community sponsors fund the capital stack. The state's role shifts from landlord and funder to regulator and service provider — a role it can actually afford.
Waiver-funded services (Medicaid HCBS) continue to pay for support staff and care coordination. The housing cost — the single largest line item — is removed from the state's ledger.
The $44 million lifetime liability per person becomes a $300,000–$500,000 capital investment in a home that the resident owns. The math is not close.
"We are not asking for a waiver. We are not asking for a grant. We are offering to retire a $44 million liability for the cost of a house. Pennsylvania's rules are the only thing standing in the way."
The state's argument against private ownership models is always the same: who pays for the services? The answer is a financial architecture that Pennsylvania has never tried — and that the math demands it consider.
The proposal is this: redirect 3–4 years of the state's existing per-person service commitment — money the state is already legally obligated to spend — into a capitalized endowment for each resident housed. Not new money. Not a grant. The same dollars already owed, redirected once, to fund services in perpetuity from interest alone.
Covered by resident/family equity, private investors, and community sponsors. The home is an asset — it appreciates, it can be sold, it generates equity. This is not a cost. It is a capital investment in a permanent asset.
At a standard 4% perpetual withdrawal rate, an $8 million endowment generates $318,000/year in services — forever. Principal intact. No annual appropriation. No waitlist. No broken promise.
"Give us 3–4 years of your existing per-person funding — once, for each person we house. Not new money. The same dollars you are already obligated to spend. After that, they are off your books. Permanently."
All figures on this page are estimates based on Pennsylvania ODP data, the 1991 CHIPP program benchmark, CPI inflation adjustment, and standard endowment withdrawal rate modeling. Actual costs will vary by individual, service intensity, and community design. These figures have not yet been validated against a specific service provider's cost structure. Even at a factor of 2–5× variance in either direction, the core conclusion holds: a capitalized endowment model retires the state's lifetime liability at a fraction of the cost of the current system. Front Porch Cohousing is actively working with service partners to produce auditable, provider-validated cost models for legislative review.
Pennsylvania's Office of Developmental Programs applies the federal HCBS Settings Rule in a way that treats any planned community where a majority of residents have IDD as presumptively institutional — regardless of whether residents own their homes, regardless of whether they chose to live there, and regardless of what the research says about outcomes.
This interpretation conflates voluntary homeownership with forced institutionalization. It treats a person who holds a deed and chose their neighbors the same way it treats a person who was warehoused at Pennhurst against their will. The distinction is not subtle. It is the entire basis of the legal and moral argument for community living.
You cannot "warehouse" someone who owns their own home. The state's current regulatory interpretation does not protect people with IDD. It protects the state from having to build something better.
Front Porch Cohousing is developing Coliving Homes in Neuroinclusive Planned Communities — small-scale, ownership-based residential communities designed specifically for adults with autism, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, and related IDD conditions.
Residents own their homes. Families and investors hold equity. Support services are delivered on-site. The community is integrated, permanent, and dignified. It is exactly what the Pennhurst research pointed toward — and exactly what Pennsylvania's current rules are designed to prevent.
This microsite presents documented evidence of Pennsylvania's century-long pattern of institutional harm to adults with IDD and the regulatory overcorrection that continues it today. Every claim is grounded in court records, federal studies, and public data. This is not advocacy. This is the record.