Disability Support AutoCascade System

A Framework for Streamlined, Equitable, and Cost-Saving Disability Services

Copyright & Open Collaboration Notice

This work is published for open collaboration and ethical adaptation. Each page is timestamped to establish authorship and may be shared, cited, adapted, or prototyped — including for commercial use — with clear attribution to the author.

If you wish to build upon, integrate, or publicly reproduce any part of this work, please contact me in advance to align on scope and intent.

These innovations emerge from lived research, interdisciplinary practice, and a commitment to collective well-being. They are shared not as static designs but as living frameworks — continuously evolving toward more humane, accessible systems.

Citation suggestion: Busireddy, H. (2025).

Disability Support AutoCascade System

(Open Collaboration Draft, CC BY 4.0). Retrieved from

this public page.

Partnership & Implementation Clause

This innovation may be implemented or piloted only through active partnership with Harshini Busireddy to ensure fidelity to its founding intent, ethical standards, and accessibility goals.

Collaborations—whether through government, research, clinical, educational, or engineering channels—must include the author in program design, review, or governance roles for all pilots, adaptations, or scale-up efforts.

Partnership inquiries are invited for:

Implementation pilots (county, state, or institutional level)
Research and validation collaborations
Ethical commercialization under open-standards compliance

Each partnership will include clear documentation of intent, responsibilities, and version traceability to prevent mission drift and ensure that all implementations honor the framework’s original purpose of advancing collective well-being.

Please contact me for partnership discussions. Looking forward to working with you.

Introduction

The current disability support system in the U.S. is fragmented, slow, and burdensome.
People with disabilities must apply to multiple programs individually, often repeating the same information,
undergoing multiple assessments, and waiting months or years for critical supports. This delay increases human
suffering and drives higher costs for counties and states due to preventable crises (ER visits, institutionalization, housing loss).

The AutoCascade System replaces fragmentation with one intake, one assessment, and one integrated referral cascade — embedding guardrails for accountability, fraud prevention, and fiscal responsibility.

Core Concept

Trigger: When a qualifying disability diagnosis or functional limitation is entered into a person’s medical record (EHR), the insurance provider or county system automatically initiates the cascade.

Cascade:

The individual receives a notice (mail/email/portal) outlining programs and supports they may qualify for.
A single integrated form (covering income, medical, functional, and household info) is requested.
One comprehensive assessment is scheduled (home-based or virtual).
Supports are allocated based on standardized thresholds, while optional referrals are initiated for community resources.

What the System Does

Streamlines Access: One form, one assessment, multiple programs.
Auto-Matching: Diagnoses and functional data link directly to program eligibility algorithms.
Choice & Consent: Clients select which supports/referrals they want.
Integrated Referrals: Community resources receive auto-notifications when a client opts in.
Real-Time Quick Supports: Assessors carry adaptive tools (e.g., reachers, shower chairs) for immediate distribution during visits.
Annual Reassessment: Keeps services accurate without requiring full reapplication.

What the System Does Not Do

It does not auto-approve all benefits — each support retains eligibility thresholds.
It does not bypass provider verification — doctors must confirm functional limitations.
It does not remove human judgment — AI aids cross-checking, but human assessors validate outcomes.
It does not guarantee full coverage — supports may still be partial depending on available resources.

Guardrails & Accountability

Standardized Protocols

Assessment tools with uniform scoring.
Tiered eligibility thresholds (e.g., mobility levels).
Mandatory reassessment every 12 months.

AI + Data Cross-Checks

Pattern detection (e.g., claims vs. function mismatches).
Outlier alerts for high/low approval assessors.
Predictive safeguards to flag unusual cost profiles.

Randomized Audits

5–10% of cases pulled quarterly for deep review.
Independent auditors re-verify with client + provider.
Tracks whether supports reduce ER use or institutionalization.

Provider Verification Layer

Confirmation ping to the diagnosing provider: Does this diagnosis = functional limitation as reported?
Providers can add context (e.g., “patient ambulates with cane but unsafe alone”).
Accountability for repeat over-endorsement.

Client Safeguards

Transparent dashboard: client sees what was requested vs. approved.
Easy appeals process.
Client choice on which referrals to accept.

Benefits & Savings

For Individuals

Faster access to supports → fewer crises.
Less paperwork → reduced stress and better compliance.
Autonomy preserved through choice and consent.

For Counties / States

Cost Savings from Prevented Crises

Reduced ER visits, hospitalizations, nursing-home placements.
Supportive housing saves $6–10k per person annually; integrated care saves 7–15% on Medicaid costs.

Efficiency Gains

One assessment replaces many, saving assessor labor hours.
AI flags anomalies, easing caseworker backlog.

Community Strengthening

Automated referrals improve engagement with local nonprofits without extra county coordination.

Limitations & Risks

Upfront Investment: Training assessors, developing AI systems, integrating with EHR/claims data.
Misuse Risk: Individuals with resources may still attempt to maximize benefits; mitigated by provider verification + audits.
Equity Risks: Tech-heavy systems must stay accessible (mail, phone, in-person options).
Provider Burden: Extra verification step should be one-click within the EHR.

Pilot Pathway

Choose Pilot County: e.g., Alameda County with Medi-Cal ECM / Community Supports.
Target Population: Begin with one category (mobility-impairing conditions).
Develop Unified Intake Form aligned with Medi-Cal + IHSS + Housing Supports.
Launch 1-Year Pilot: 200–300 participants.
Measure Outcomes: ER visits, service utilization, client satisfaction, cost offsets.
Iterate & Scale: Expand to additional diagnoses and counties.

Conclusion

The Disability Support AutoCascade System offers a pragmatic, fiscally responsible path to improve lives while saving public dollars.
By replacing today’s fragmented, reactive service maze with a proactive, automatic cascade, counties and states can:

Improve health and safety outcomes.
Reduce preventable high-cost crises.
Build public trust through transparency and efficiency.

It’s not a silver bullet — just a smarter, faster, safer foundation for disability support delivery.

Interested in piloting or adapting this framework?
Reach out at harshinibusireddy.com/contact to collaborate on design, testing, or policy translation.

Contents