Why 1:3 Staffing?

One of the questions we’re likely to hear when we talk about the True North Living model is:

“Why one staff member for three residents?”

It’s a fair question.

Staffing is one of the most important parts of a residential program. The people supporting residents have a tremendous influence on their safety, independence, quality of life and overall experience.

So why did we choose a 1:3 staffing model?

Because we believe staffing should be based on what people actually need, not simply on the idea that more staff automatically means better care.

Support isn’t the same as constant supervision.

The people we intend to serve are adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities who have varying levels of independence.

Some may be able to prepare their own meals.

Some may manage their own personal care.

Some may take their medications independently or need only limited assistance.

Some may work.

Some may use public transportation or eventually learn to do so.

Others may need more support in particular areas.

That doesn’t mean they need someone standing beside them every minute of every day.

Needing support does not automatically mean needing 1:1 supervision.

Our goal is to provide assistance where it is needed while preserving independence everywhere it is possible.

One staff member. Three people. One household.

The basic True North model is designed around a maximum of three residents in a home.

One staff member can therefore support the household while residents go about their daily lives.

That might mean helping someone prepare breakfast while another resident gets ready for work.

It might mean assisting with medications while another resident is doing laundry.

It might mean helping someone make a grocery list while another resident is relaxing in the living room.

It might mean driving residents into the community for an activity.

And sometimes it might mean doing something as simple as sitting at the kitchen table and talking.

Residential support isn’t just about tasks.

It’s about being present.

Twelve-hour shifts are intentional, too.

Our initial staffing model uses 12-hour shifts.

Why? Because consistency matters.

We don’t want residents constantly adjusting to a parade of different people coming and going throughout the day.

Longer shifts can allow staff to become familiar with the household’s routines, personalities and individual needs.

That familiarity matters.

A staff member who knows a resident well may notice that they’re quieter than usual.

They may recognize that someone is becoming overwhelmed before the situation escalates.

They may know that a particular resident needs a little extra time to process a request.

They may know that another resident would rather be given a choice than a command.

Good support comes from knowing the person.

But 1:3 doesn’t mean “three people get one-third of a staff member.”

This is an important distinction.

A 1:3 model doesn’t mean every resident receives exactly the same amount of attention.

People aren’t vending machines that require equal amounts of input.

One resident might need assistance getting ready for work. Another might be completely independent that morning. Another might need help communicating a concern.

Staff respond according to the individual’s needs.

The objective is individualized support within a shared household, not identical treatment.

Fairness doesn’t always mean everyone gets the same thing.

Sometimes fairness means everyone gets what they need.

What happens when someone needs more support?

This is where individualized planning becomes important.

Our starting model is 1:3.

It is not a promise that every person will always have the same support needs.

People change. Health changes. Abilities change. Circumstances change.

A person who is highly independent today may need additional support temporarily because of illness, injury, emotional distress or another circumstance.

Conversely, someone who initially needs considerable assistance may develop skills that allow staff to step back.

That’s why we’re interested in knowing the person rather than simply assigning a staffing number.

If someone’s needs consistently exceed what can safely and appropriately be supported within the household’s model, we need to recognize that.

The answer isn’t to squeeze more needs into the same staffing arrangement.

The answer is to reassess what that person needs.

We don’t want staff doing everything.

This may sound strange coming from a residential provider, but it is one of the things we feel most strongly about.

If a resident can do something independently, we want them doing it.

If they can do part of a task, we want them doing the part they can do.

If they need assistance with one step, we want to assist with that step—not automatically take over the entire task.

Why?

Because independence isn’t created by doing things for people.

Independence is created by giving people opportunities to do things themselves.

Sometimes the best staff member is the one who knows when to step in.

And just as importantly, when to step back.

The staff member is part of the household—not a security guard.

We don’t envision staff spending twelve hours sitting in a chair watching residents.

We envision staff participating in the life of the home.

Cooking. Teaching. Driving.

Supporting. Encouraging. Problem-solving. Laughing.

Going into the community. Helping residents pursue their goals.

And occasionally reminding someone that, yes, the dishes really do need to be washed.

Because this is supposed to be a home, not a surveillance station.

Safety still comes first.

A 1:3 model only works when the residents living together are appropriate for that model and the staffing arrangement can safely meet their needs.

Resident compatibility matters. Individual support needs matter.

Emergency preparedness matters. Staff training matters.

And knowing when a situation requires additional assistance matters.

We aren’t going to sacrifice safety simply to maintain a staffing ratio.

The ratio is a starting model, not a substitute for good judgment.

Why does this matter?

Because staffing is expensive.

And while controlling costs is important to keeping a residential program financially sustainable, cost should never be the only reason behind a staffing decision.

At the same time, unnecessarily staffing people at levels far beyond what they need can have unintended consequences.

It can reduce opportunities for independence.

It can make ordinary activities feel like supervised activities.

And it can reinforce the idea that a person is less capable than they actually are.

We want to find the middle ground:

Enough support to be safe and successful.

Enough independence to live a real life.

That’s the True North approach.

We aren’t trying to see how few staff we can get away with.

And we’re not trying to see how many staff we can put in a house.

We’re asking a different question:

“What level of support allows these individuals to be safe, successful and as independent as possible?”

For the residents we’re designing True North Living around, we believe a small household with a 1:3 staffing model provides a strong foundation.

It keeps the environment personal. It allows staff to know the residents.

It supports community involvement.

And it gives residents room to do what they can do for themselves.

Because the goal isn’t to have someone available to do everything for you.

The goal is to have someone there when you need them—and the freedom to do it yourself when you don’t.

That’s what 1:3 means at True North Living.