WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Heartland for Children is the not-for-profit agency responsible for the foster care system in Polk, Highlands, and Hardee Counties.
read more >>

VOLUNTEER TESTIMONIAL

Judy Kay, LCSW

Volunteer Roles: Peer Reviewer; Team Leader

In administration for 22 of 24 years at Child Saving Institute, a COA-accredited not-for-profit child welfare agency in Omaha, Nebraska. Retired approximately two years ago, I moved to Tucson, Arizona, where I advocate for children's rights as a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) volunteer to three young children.
read more>>

Purpose

Individuals and families that use Housing Stabilization and Community Living Services obtain and maintain stable housing in the community and strengthen personal support systems in order to live as independently as possible.

PA-HSCL 1: Service Philosophy

The program is guided by a service philosophy that:

  1. sets forth a logical approach for how services, supports, activities, and interventions will empower and meet the needs of service recipients;
  2. values consumer choice and promotes community integration;
  3. ensures that services are strengths-based, person- or family-centered, culturally and linguistically competent, and trauma-informed; and
  4. guides the development and implementation of program activities and individualized services based on the best available evidence of service effectiveness.

Interpretation: A functional service philosophy, logic model, or similar framework, guides program development and implementation by linking the agency’s mission or purpose with strategies, practices, or tools needed to integrate these into daily work. A well-defined and visible practice model will help staff and stakeholders think systematically about how the program can make a measureable difference by drawing clear connections between the program values, service population needs, available resources, program activities and interventions, program outputs, and desired outcomes.

Interpretation: Agency self-assessments can evaluate the extent to which agencies’ policies and practices are trauma-informed, as well as identify strengths and barriers in regards to trauma-informed service delivery and provision. For example, agencies can evaluate staff training and professional development opportunities and review supervision ratios to assess whether personnel are trained and supported on trauma-informed care practices. Agencies can also conduct an internal review of their assessment and service planning processes to ensure that services are being delivered in a trauma-informed manner.

Research Note: A trauma-informed approach is one that involves recognizing the signs and symptoms of trauma, and responding by emphasizing/considering the following during service delivery:

  • safety; 
  • trustworthiness and transparency;
  • peer support; 
  • collaboration and mutuality; 
  • empowerment, voice, and choice; and 
  • cultural, historical, and gender issues. 

Table of Evidence

Self-Study Evidence On-Site Evidence On-Site Activities
    • Service Philosophy
    • Policies for prohibited interventions
No On-Site Evidence
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel

  • PA-HSCL 1.01

    The program is guided by a philosophy that provides a logical basis for services and supports to be delivered in a trauma-informed and culturally and linguistically competent manner, based on program goals and the best available evidence of service effectiveness.


  • FP
    PA-HSCL 1.02

    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 as a disciplinary action;
    6. forced physical exercise to eliminate behaviors;
    7. punitive work assignments;
    8. punishment by peers;
    9. group punishment or discipline for individual behavior; and
    10. unwarranted use of invasive procedures and activities as a disciplinary action.

Copyright © 2018 Council on Accreditation. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy and Terms of Use