Private Organization Accreditation

Stillwater-based FamilyMeans provides services in budget and credit counseling, mental health, collaborative divorce, caregiver support, youth programming, and an employee assistance program. 


Nuevo Amanecer Latino Children's Services

Galo A. Rodriguez, M.P.H., President & CEO

Since Nuevo Amanecer Latino Children’s Services pursued its COA accreditation on October 14, 2004, this corporation has sustained a continuous quality improvement process by not looking whom to blame among the involved parties but improving what we have already done well… because good enough is not good enough.
read more>>


An agency-wide Performance and Quality Improvement system effectively engages staff, persons served, and other stakeholders in advancing the agency’s mission and achieving strategic goals through continuous, integrated, data-driven efforts to improve service delivery and administrative practice.

PA-PQI 3: Roles and Responsibilities

Staff at all levels of the agency participate in, conduct, and sustain performance and quality improvement activities.

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
    • Job description of staff person(s) responsible for implementation and coordination of the PQI department or program (PA-PQI 3.01, 3.02)
    • Staff PQI training description and curricula table(s) of contents (PA-PQI 3.03) broken down by job category including: 
      1. staff coordinating the agency's PQI system (PA-PQI 3.01, PA-PQI 3.02)
      2. supervisors, program directors, and senior managers (PA-PQI 3.04)
    State Administered Agency (Regional Office) 
    • Job description of regional staff person(s) responsible for oversight and coordination of PQI activities, if applicable (PA-PQI 3.01, 3.02)
    • Training materials pertinent to local PQI activities
    All Agencies
    • Training curricula and materials
    • Training files, database, or personnel files that demonstrate attendance at required PQI trainings 
    All Agencies
    • Interview:
      1. PQI staff 
      2. Managers and program directors 
      3. Staff at all levels 
    • Network only interview:
      1. Subcontracted providers
      2. Staff participating in the network-level PQI activities

  • PA-PQI 3.01

    Staff responsible for implementing and coordinating the agency’s PQI process demonstrate competency in sound measurement practices including: 
    1. identifying indicators of quality practice for the programs being evaluated;
    2. implementing internal and external evaluation methods, such as benchmarking, appropriate to the programs being evaluated;
    3. ensuring proper data entry and data integrity; and
    4. collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data from a range of sources.

  • PA-PQI 3.02

    Staff responsible for implementing and coordinating the agency’s PQI process demonstrate competency in effectively engaging people throughout the agency by: 

    1. assessing staff and other stakeholder training and resource needs; and
    2. communicating evidence and findings to staff and other stakeholders in a manner that facilitates their active engagement and reflects an understanding of the practice standards associated with the programs being evaluated.

  • PA-PQI 3.03

    Staff receive ongoing training in PQI activities, including, as appropriate to individual roles and responsibilities:
    1. the goals, relevance, and inherent value of the PQI process; 
    2. the roles of all staff in implementing the PQI process;
    3. data collection tools and forms;  
    4. the key decision-making junctures in their work and how data should inform decisions; and
    5. case review processes and associated forms.

    Interpretation: Training on the case review processes should include conflict of interest guidelines, mechanisms for addressing safety concerns in the cases under review, and procedures for conducting case-related interviews, as applicable. See PA-PQI 5 for more information.
    Interpretation: Job descriptions must outline each position’s PQI responsibilities to inform the content of PQI training for various job categories.  Please see PA-HR 3.01 for more information on job descriptions.

  • PA-PQI 3.04

    Supervisors of direct service staff, program directors, and senior managers demonstrate competency in: 
    1. collecting, monitoring, and interpreting data and using this evidence to evaluate and discuss performance as it relates to outcomes;
    2. targeting areas of improvement;
    3. supporting staff in ensuring data collection and integrity; and
    4. supporting staff in using data as evidence to inform casework and operational decision-making. 

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