Comments on an article by Dunst and Bruder. Service coordination was supposed to be one of the major jewels in the legislative crown for young children with disabilities and their families. The authors have cast their experienced eyes on the heart of the matter, which is the models of service coordination that sprang to life almost immediately after P.L. 99-457 was passed. Results of the study in question showed that the dedicated and independent model was associated with service coordinators' providing fewer services than they did in the other models. This study did not include the question of whether families received the help anyway, from their service providers. The current mania for outcomes has led to much attention to ends and not enough to means, and it is the means that families are dealing with. Service coordination activities that different families really want or benefit from should be identified and examined with respect to how much families are receiving them. The study might lead to the conclusion that the intra-agency model might be the best solution, combining benefits reported here with the possibility of a mechanism "for families to challenge disagreeable service delivery arrangements and to assert their own needs and priorities." But many communities are not organized by agencies or programs.