WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Consumer Credit Counseling Service of the Savannah Area's mission is to provide the best non-profit community service, dedicated to delivering professional and confidential counseling, debt management, housing counseling and consumer education to all segments of the community regardless of ability to pay.
read more >>

ORGANIZATION TESTIMONIAL

Brewer-Porch Children's Center

James W. Thompson, Executive Director

The COA standards as applied to the operations at Brewer-Porch Children’s Center at The University of Alabama has given the administration an opportunity to examine best practice and improve the quality of care provided to clients.
read more>>

Purpose

Juvenile Justice Day Services promote public safety and reduce the need for out-of-home placements by allowing youth to reside in their communities while they address problems and develop the attitudes and skills needed to make responsible choices, avoid negative behaviors, and become productive, connected, and law-abiding members of their communities.

JJD 2: Service Planning and Monitoring

Youth participate in the development and ongoing review of service plans that are the basis for delivery of appropriate services, support, and supervision.

Interpretation: When services are provided as aftercare that follows another more intensive program, “service plans” may actually be “transition” or “reentry” plans developed before youth were released from their previous placements. However, the organization is still expected to partner with personnel at those previous placements to facilitate effective planning and ensure that the standards are implemented.

NA The organization provides less-intensive day services.

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 (HR 6.02) and training (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 (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
    • Service planning and monitoring procedures
    • Documentation of case review
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Youth served and their families
    • Review case records

  • JJD 2.01

    A service plan is developed in a timely manner, and expedited service planning is available when urgent risks or needs are identified.


  • JJD 2.02

    Youth and relevant personnel are involved in developing service plans.

    Interpretation: Relevant personnel can include personnel from other organizations and agencies. For example, organizations providing aftercare services should partner with staff at the youth’s previous placement to develop an appropriate plan, as referenced in the Interpretation to JJD 2. Regardless of personnel involved, service planning should be conducted so that youth retain as much personal responsibility as possible and appropriate, and the organization should follow applicable state laws or regulations requiring involvement or consent of youths’ legal guardians.


  • JJD 2.03

    During service planning the organization explains:

    1. the range of services available;
    2. how the organization can support the achievement of desired outcomes;
    3. how youth and their progress will be monitored;
    4. any special rules, terms, or conditions, including conditions ordered by the court or public agency with jurisdiction over the youth;
    5. benefits to be gained if the plan is fulfilled; and
    6. possible consequences of noncompliance.

    Interpretation: Relevant terms or conditions can include, but are not limited to: mandated program attendance, school attendance, curfews, and drug testing.


  • JJD 2.04

    The comprehensive service plan is based on the assessment and includes:

    1. desired goals and outcomes, and timeframes for achieving them;
    2. services and supports to be provided, and by whom;
    3. any unmet service and support needs;
    4. level of supervision needed, including any outside contacts required; and
    5. the signature of the youth and a parent or legal guardian.

    Interpretation: Like assessments, service plans should be responsive to the age, developmental level, gender, language, culture, religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and trauma history of youth, as well as to the characteristics of, and resources available in, the communities in which they reside.

    Although COA recognizes that engaging parents or legal guardians can be difficult, organizations should still strive to involve them to the extent possible and appropriate, and must follow any applicable laws or regulations requiring their involvement. See JJD 5 for further information and guidance regarding family participation.

    Note: Behavior support and management strategies and interventions should be addressed a behavior support plan that may be part of the service plan, as referenced in BSM 2.06.


  • JJD 2.05

    Family members are involved in service planning and case conferences, and advised of ongoing progress.

    Note: See the Interpretation to JJD 2.04.


  • JJD 2.06

    Personnel and youth regularly review progress toward achievement of goals, and sign revisions to goals and plans.


  • JJD 2.07

    A worker and a supervisor, or a team of relevant personnel, review the case quarterly to assess:

    1. service plan implementation;
    2. progress toward achieving service goals and desired outcomes;
    3. the continuing appropriateness of service goals and timeframes; and
    4. the level of supervision needed.

    Interpretation: Timeframes for review can be adjusted depending upon youths’ risks and needs, and the anticipated duration of service. Experienced workers may conduct reviews of their own cases. In such cases, their supervisors should review a sample of their evaluations.

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