27/08/2026
Does the terminology we use in PBS plans actually help the people who need to use them?💭
PBS plans need to be professionally sound, but they also need to be understood by the staff implementing them.
If a support worker picks up a plan and has to Google terminology before they understand what they’re supposed to do, we’ve already created a barrier to implementation.
I’ve even experienced this myself as a practitioner. I’ve gone into roles where I’ve had to Google terms used by previous practitioners just to understand the plan.
It made me think: if practitioners have to decode a plan, what are we expecting from busy support staff?
A good PBS plan should allow staff to pick it up and know:
* What do I need to do?
* When do I do it?
* Why am I doing it?
And if we’re genuinely co-producing plans with the people we support, shouldn’t they be able to understand what we’ve written about them too?
Professional terminology has its place, but being technical shouldn’t come at the expense of being accessible.
For me, the best PBS plan isn’t the one that sounds the most professional.
It’s the one that people can understand, agree with, and actually implement.
What are your thoughts on terminology in PBS plans?
Have you ever come across a plan that was technically sound but difficult to actually use? What are your thoughts of terminology used in PBS plans?👇🏼