WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

As one of the largest family services agencies in the country, Child & Family Services has dedicated its resources to meet the needs of the community since 1873.
read more >>

ORGANIZATION TESTIMONIAL

Orange County Government, Youth & Family Services Division

Rodney J. Hrobar Sr., LMHC, CPP, Quality Assurance Manager

As the lead agency in Orange County, providing the safety net for children and families, it is reassuring that our clients can be confident that their needs will be addressed in accordance with the most stringent standards of public, as well as private, accountability as monitored and reviewed by the Council on Accreditation. 
read more>>

Purpose

A qualified, trained, and supported workforce contributes to the delivery of quality services that promote customer satisfaction and positive service delivery results. 

MIL-HR 6: Employee Files

The MFR program has a local, confidential system for tracking relevant staff information.

Rating Indicators
1
Full Implementation, Outstanding Performance
A rating of (1) indicates that the programs’ practices fully meet the standard and reflect a high level of capacity.  All elements or requirements outlined in the standard are evident in practice, with rare or no exceptions; exceptions do not impact service quality or overall performance.  
2
Substantial Implementation, Good Performance 
A rating of (2) indicates that a programs’ infrastructure and practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement. The majority of the standards requirements have been met and the basic framework required by the standard has been implemented.  Minor inconsistencies and practices that are not fully developed are noted; however, these do not significantly impact service quality or overall performance.
3
Partial Implementation, Concerning Performance
A rating of (3) indicates that significant aspects of the programs’ observed infrastructure and/or practices require significant improvement. The program has not implemented the basic framework of the standard but instead has in place only part(s) of this framework. Omissions or exceptions to the practices outlined in the standard occur regularly, or practices are implemented in a cursory or haphazard manner.  Service quality or program functioning may be compromised. Capacity is at a basic level.
4
Unsatisfactory Implementation and Performance
A rating of (4) indicates that implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all. The programs’ observed administration and management infrastructure and practices are weak or non-existent; or show signs of neglect, stagnation, or deterioration.

Please see Rating Guidance for additional rating examples. 

Table of Evidence

Self-Study Evidence On-Site Evidence On-Site Activities
No Self-Study Evidence
    • Local-level documentation for tracking relevant staff information (MIL-HR 6.01, MIL-HR 6.02)
    • Staff emergency contact list (MIL-HR 6.03)
    • Procedures regarding access to staff information (MIL-HR 6.04)
    • Interview: 
      1. MFR program director

  • MIL-HR 6.01

    The MFR program has mechanisms in place to track completion of the following for its government employees and volunteers, when applicable:

    1. background investigations;
    2. current certification and/or licensure;
    3. required trainings;
    4. supervision; and
    5. performance reviews.

    Interpretation: While the MFR program director may not have direct access to completed performance reviews or background checks, the intent of MIL-HR 6.01 is to ensure that the MFR program director has a system in place for tracking that these activities have occurred in accordance with established timelines for relevant MFR program staff.

    Note: This standard will be NA for volunteers if the MFR program is being reviewed under Volunteer Coordination (MIL-VC).


  • MIL-HR 6.02

    The MFR program has mechanisms in place to track that contractors have completed the following as permitted or required in the contract:

    1. government directed trainings; and
    2. background investigations.


  • MIL-HR 6.03

    The MFR program director has acess to emergency contact information for all staff. 


  • MIL-HR 6.04

    Access to private or confidential staff information maintained on-site is limited to authorized staff on a need-to-know basis.

    Note: For more information on which of COA’s standards will be included as part of the Peer Review Team’s facility observation, please see the following tool: Facility Observation Checklist – MFR.

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