WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Debt Education and Certification Foundation (DECAF), a private non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, provides high-quality financial education and counseling, with nationwide outreach throughout the U.S. DECAF is HUD-approved, and recognized as one of the 100 Best Companies to Work for in Texas.
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 Residential Services promote public safety by providing youth with a supportive, structured setting that helps them address their needs and develop the attitudes and skills needed to make responsible choices, avoid negative behaviors, and become productive, connected, and law-abiding citizens.

JJR 3: Service Philosophy, Modalities, and Interventions

The program’s service philosophy:

  1. sets forth a logical approach for how services and the service environment will meet the needs of youth while protecting the safety of other residents, personnel, and the public;
  2. guides the development and implementation of program activities and services based on the best available evidence of effectiveness; and
  3. outlines the service modalities and interventions that personnel may employ.

Interpretation: A program model or logic model can be a useful tool to help staff think systematically about how the program can make a measureable difference by drawing a clear connection between the service population’s needs, available resources, program activities and interventions, program outputs, and desired outcomes.

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
  • Written service philosophy needs improvement or clarification; or
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions procedures are understood by staff and are being used; 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 rare instances required consent was not obtained; or
  • Monitoring procedures need minor clarification; or
  • With few exceptions the policy on prohibited interventions is understood by staff, or the written policy needs minor clarification.
3
Practice requires significant improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards. Service quality or program functioning may be compromised; e.g.,
  • The written service philosophy needs significant improvement; or
  • Procedures and/or case record documentation need significant strengthening; or
  • Procedures are not well-understood or used appropriately; or
  • Documentation is inconsistent or in in some instances is missing and no corrective action has not been initiated; or
  • Required consent is often not obtained; or
  • A few personnel who are employing non-traditional or unconventional interventions have not completed training, as required; or
  • There are gaps in monitoring of interventions, as required; or
  • Policy on prohibited interventions does not include at least one of the required elements; or
  • Service philosophy is not clearly related to expressed mission or programs of the organization; 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.,
  • There is no written service philosophy; or
  • There are no written policy or 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
    • Include service philosophy in the Narrative
    • Policies for prohibited interventions
    • Procedures for use of non-traditional or unconventional practices
    • Table of contents of training curricula
    • Documentation of training
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Youth served
    • Review case records

  • JJR 3.01

    The program is guided by a philosophy that provides a logical basis for the services, support, and supervision provided, based on goals and the best available evidence of effectiveness.

    Interpretation: As referenced in the Note to the JJR Purpose Statement, juvenile justice organizations seeking COA accreditation are expected to demonstrate a commitment to rehabilitation and reintegration.


  • FP
    JJR 3.02

    If the organization permits the use of service modalities and interventions it defines as non-traditional or unconventional, it:

    1. explains any benefits, risks, side effects, and alternatives to the youth or a legal guardian;
    2. ensures that personnel receive sufficient training, and/or certification when it is available; and
    3. monitors the use and effectiveness of such interventions.

    Interpretation: Examples of non-traditional and unconventional service modalities or interventions include, but are not limited to: hypnosis, acupuncture, and modalities or interventions that involve physical contact, such as massage therapy.

    NA The organization does not permit non-traditional or unconventional modalities or interventions.


  • FP
    JJR 3.03

    Organization policy prohibits:

    1. corporal punishment;
    2. the use of aversive stimuli;
    3. interventions that involve withholding nutrition or hydration, or that inflict physical or psychological pain;
    4. the use of demeaning, shaming, or degrading language or activities;
    5. unnecessarily punitive restrictions, including cancellation of visits, phone calls, or other forms of communication as a disciplinary action;
    6. forced physical exercise to eliminate behaviors;
    7. unwarranted use of invasive procedures or activities as a disciplinary action;
    8. punitive work assignments;
    9. punishment by peers; and
    10. group punishment or discipline for individual behavior.

  • FP
    JJR 3.04

    An intervention is discontinued immediately if it produces adverse side effects or is deemed unacceptable according to prevailing professional standards.

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