Additionally, the decision- and policy-makers who inevitably work within economically restricted mandates and environments may be disconnected from practice “on the ground”. Even when models of care are evidence-based, policy needs to be attentive to potential negative consequences of changing models of practice, and ensure that the appropriate funding mechanisms and supports are in place preventatively, rather than reactively or not at all. For example, if the literature supports increased family involvement in services, then mechanisms must be put in place to make this feasible for already busy and exhausted families, for example, by providing assistance with instrumental activities of daily living (i.e., house keeping) and ensuring that treatments fit within the context of the families’ everyday activities (Steiner, Koegel, Koegel & Ence, 2012). Funding parameters should be flexible to allow time for professionals to establish and build relationships with community partners to whom they could refer, support, and potentially transition, families. Additionally, funding for family-centered services should be based on child and family need within the context of wellbeing; not based on diagnostic label or impairment.