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 >>

VOLUNTEER TESTIMONIAL

Audrey Coleman, RN-MSN

Volunteer Roles: Military Reviewer; Peer Reviewer; Team Leader

My first experience with COA was in 1999 with what was a NC Area Program. I started as a peer reviewer in 2005, doing two to four site visits a year. I am also a team leader and have recently been approved to be a military reviewer.
read more>>

Purpose

Outreach Services identify and engage youth, adults, and families experiencing homelessness as a first step to accepting care for immediate health and safety needs, gaining access to community services and resources, taking steps toward community integration, and connecting to safe and stable housing. 

PA-OS 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 meet the needs of service recipients;
  2. ensures that services are strengths-based, person- or family-centered, culturally and linguistically competent, and trauma-informed;
  3. guides the development and implementation of program activities and 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 service population’s 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.

Rating Indicators
1
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. 
2
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.  
3
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.
4
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 service delivery 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
    • Service philosophy
No On-Site Evidence
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel
Copyright © 2019 Council on Accreditation. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy and Terms of Use