WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Catholic Charities alleviates human suffering and improves the quality of life of 100,000 people annually, regardless of religious background. A staff of 600 provides support and services related to housing, food, mental health, children's services, addiction treatment, and domestic violence services.
read more >>

VOLUNTEER TESTIMONIAL

Mike Angstadt

Volunteer Roles: Commissioner; Hague Evaluator; Lead Evaluator; Peer Reviewer; Team Leader

Serving as a Team Leader for COA has been an enriching experience in many ways. Utilizing the Contextual Accreditation process to discern the means in which agencies, offering a variety of services, located throughout the US, Canada ,the Philippines and other countries provide best and most promising practices to their consumers has been particularly rewarding. read more>>

Purpose

Job seekers who receive workforce development, support, and financial asset building services achieve increased economic self-sufficiency through the attainment and retention of jobs in the community and the promotion of asset accumulation.

CA-WDS 4: Assessment-Based Employment Planning and Monitoring

Each job seeker participates in a culturally responsive, individualized, and comprehensive assessment, which is the basis for the development and ongoing review of an employment plan that:

  1. addresses the job seeker’s needs;
  2. supports attainment of the job seeker’s goals and desired outcomes; and
  3. improves the job seeker’s ability to be self-sustaining.
Rating Indicators
1
All elements or requirements outlined in the standard are evident in practice, as indicated by full implementation of the practices outlined in the Practice standards.
2
Practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g.,  
  • Minor inconsistencies and not yet fully developed practices are noted, however, these do not significantly impact service quality; or
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions procedures are understood by staff and are being used; or
  • For the most part, established timeframes are met; or
  • Proper documentation is the norm and any issues with individual staff members are being addressed through performance evaluations (CA-HR 6.02) and training (CA-TS 2.03); or
  • In a few instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated; or
  • Active client participation occurs to a considerable extent.
3
Practice requires significant improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards. Service quality or program functioning may be compromised; e.g.,
  • Procedures and/or case record documentation need significant strengthening; or
  • Procedures are not well-understood or used appropriately; or
  • Timeframes are often missed; or
  • In a number of instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated (CA-RPM 7.04); or
  • Quarterly reviews are not being done consistently; or
  • Level of care for some clients is inappropriate; or
  • Service planning is often done without full client participation; or
  • Appropriate family involvement is not documented; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or
  • Assessments are done by referral source and no documentation and/or summary of required information present in case record; or
  • One of the Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.
4
Implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g.,
  • No written procedures, or procedures are clearly inadequate or not being used; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or  
  • Two or more Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.

Table of Evidence

Self-Study Evidence On-Site Evidence On-Site Activities
    • Assessment procedures
    • Employment planning and monitoring procedures
    • Assessment tool and/or criteria included in assessment
No On-Site Evidence
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Individuals served
    • Review case records

  • CA-WDS 4.01

    Culturally responsive assessments are conducted within timeframes established by the organization to determine the job seeker’s:

    1. previous formal and informal work experience;
    2. relevant life experiences;
    3. interests, aptitudes, and employment goals;
    4. training and educational needs;
    5. strengths and coping strategies;
    6. informal support networks; and
    7. barriers to employment.

    Interpretation: Culturally responsive assessments can include attention to geographic location, language of choice, and the person’s religious, racial, ethnic, and cultural background. Other important factors that contribute to a responsive assessment include attention to age, sexual orientation, and developmental level.


  • CA-WDS 4.02

    The organization works with the full participation of the job seeker to develop and regularly review an assessment-based employment plan that is individualized, flexible, and modified as necessary to meet his or her changing needs and goals.

    Interpretation: Employment planning is to be conducted so that the service recipient retains as much personal responsibility and self-determination as possible and desired. When the service recipient is a minor, or an adult under the care of a guardian, the organization should follow applicable provincial laws or regulations requiring involvement or consent of legal guardians.


  • CA-WDS 4.03

    To ensure the development of a comprehensive employment plan, direct service personnel are trained in the variety of services offered by the organization, directly and by referral.

Copyright © 2019 Council on Accreditation. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy and Terms of Use