Private Organization Accreditation

Children's Home Society of Florida delivers a unique spectrum of social services designed to protect children at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment; to strengthen and stabilize families; to help young people break the cycle of abuse and neglect; and to find safe, loving homes for children.


Joint Base Charleston School Age Program

Paula B. Matthews, School Age Program Coordinator

Preparing for our after school accreditation was an awesome and very valuable learning experience for the Child and Youth Professionals at Charleston Air Force Base. Becoming familiar with and understanding the After School standards was a breeze because of the training webinars and the great customer service we received from all of the COA staff. Thank you for supporting our military families.
read more>>


Agency viability and positive outcomes are achieved through efficient use of agency resources and diligent application of sound financial management practices that align with the agency’s overall strategic plan and accord with applicable legal and regulatory requirements.

PA-FIN 3: Financial Planning

Financial planning is agency-wide and involves key stakeholders.

Interpretation: Agencies should develop or utilize a financial planning model that provides a framework for:
  1. clarifying the linkage between strategic planning and resource allocation decisions;
  2. resource allocation that is outcomes-oriented, consumer-centric, and data-driven; and 
  3. supporting and promoting long-term financial sustainability.

Rating Indicators
Full Implementation, Outstanding Performance
A rating of (1) indicates that the agency's 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 agency performance. 
Substantial Implementation, Good Performance
A rating of (2) indicates that an agency's 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 not yet fully developed practices are noted; however, these do not significantly impact service quality or agency performance.
Partial Implementation, Concerning Performance
  • A rating of (3) indicates that the agency's observed infrastructure and/or practices require significant improvement.  
  • The agency has not implemented the basic framework of the standard but instead has in place only part 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 agency functioning may be compromised.  
  • Capacity is at a basic level.
Unsatisfactory Implementation or Performance
  • A rating of (4) indicates that implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all.  
  • The agency’s 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
    County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
    • Documents that demonstrate budget planning for current fiscal year including:
      1. Financial data reports
      2. Finance-related performance improvement data reports
      3. Budget planning meeting schedules, agendas, and minutes (PA-FIN 3.01, PA-FIN 3.02)
    • Auditors' recommendations from the most recent audit(s), when applicable (PA-FIN 3.03)
    • Fiscal summary reviews from the previous fiscal year (PA-FIN 3.04)
    • Budget-to-actual variance anaylsis for previous fiscal year (PA-FIN 3.04)
    • Financial reports to oversight authority for previous fiscal year (PA-FIN 3.05)
    • Cost analysis reports for previous fiscal year (PA-FIN 3.06, PA-FIN 3.07)
    State Administered Agency (Regional Office)
    • Documents that demonstrate regional budget planning (reports, planning meeting minutes (current fiscal year)) (PA-FIN 3.01, 3.02)
    County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
    • Annual budget
    • Most recent audit(s) (PA-FIN 3.03)
    • Evidence of actions taken to address issues noted in most recent audit(s), when applicable (PA-FIN 3.03)
    • Documentation of advocacy efforts including copies of reports , budget proposals, meeting minutes, etc. (PA-FIN 3.08)
    State Administered Agency (Regional Office)
    • No On-Site Evidence
    County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
    • Interview:
      1. Fiscal authority
      2. Agency head
      3. Agency leadership
      4. CFO or equivalent
    State Administered Agency (Regional Office)
    • Interview:
      1. Regional Director
      2. Agency leadership
      3. Financial personnel

  • PA-FIN 3.01

    The budget planning process is a collaboration between the agency’s administrative, program, field, and budget personnel.

    Research Note: Open, collaborative budget and financial planning processes foster a culture of accountability and shared purpose by promoting staff buy-in and a commitment to effective and efficient use of agency resources throughout all levels of the agency. 

  • PA-FIN 3.02

    To maximize use of fiscal resources, the budget planning process is data-driven and based on:

    1. direct and indirect operating expenditures;
    2. contractual and/or regulatory requirements;
    3. performance improvement and outcomes data;
    4. the agency’s mission, and strategic priorities;
    5. changing costs and conditions, including environmental challenges and opportunities; and
    6. anticipated revenue for the fiscal year.

    Research Note: The literature identifies two types of data that are critical to supporting budget and finance work.  They include data that monitors the fiscal health of the agency (financial data) and data that monitors the impact of financial resources on outcomes for individuals and families served (finance-related performance improvement data).  

  • PA-FIN 3.03

    The agency’s fiscal authority:

    1. approves the budget and any revisions to the budget;
    2. reviews fiscal summaries at least quarterly to evaluate expenditures against revenues;
    3. ensures that budget-to-actual variance analyses are performed after year end numbers are finalized; and
    4. reviews fiscal policy and the recommendations of the agency’s auditors, and takes appropriate action.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

  • PA-FIN 3.04

    Financial information is routinely analyzed and includes:

    1. a monthly and annual analysis of financial performance against budget projection with budget-to-actual variance analyses performed on interim financial statements of activities;
    2. service revenues and actual service delivery costs; and
    3. an annual inventory of significant assets, including securities.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

  • PA-FIN 3.05

    For planning purposes agency leadership reports to the oversight authority on the agency’s finances, including:

    1. current financial status and any anticipated problems;
    2. shifting strategic priorities and their financial implications; and
    3. financial planning and funding alternatives.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

  • PA-FIN 3.06

    The agency conducts cost analyses of its services and can identify the fixed and variable costs of each unit of service at each program and service delivery site.

    NA The agency is a network management entity.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

  • PA-FIN 3.07

    The agency conducts  cost analyses of contracted services at established intervals and the information is used to analyze operational effectiveness and efficiency and to monitor trends, current experiences, and changes in costs. 

    NA The agency is a network management entity.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

  • PA-FIN 3.08

    When necessary, agency leadership advocates for increased funding as part of the budget planning process by:

    1. articulating resource needs as they relate to improved outcomes for individuals and families; and
    2. establishing methods to track and report on annual progress towards achieving long-term goals.

    Interpretation: For child and family services agencies, implementation of PA-FIN 3.08 includes tracking and reporting out on the agency’s progress toward achieving the outcomes identified in the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) and the funding that will be required to meet related performance improvement goals.

    Research Note: When making the business case for increased funding, it is not enough to outline resource needs as they relate to improved outputs, such as reduced caseloads. Agency leadership must be able to articulate the agency’s funding needs in terms of return on investment by, for example, emphasizing how reduced caseloads will impact outcomes for individuals and families.
    One successful example of this is the Nurturing Parenting Program (NPP) for Infants, Toddlers, and Preschoolers in Louisiana, which has used cost-savings analysis to quantify the cost savings the state has benefited from since the program was initiated and identify how increased savings could be realized.

    NA State-administered agency regional office

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