WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Lutheran Social Services of New England is a high-performing nonprofit organization. LSS is a powerful difference maker and go-to resource, driving ourselves to constantly anticipate futures that are different from the past. For 140 years, LSS has been caring for people in need in New England.
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

Youth participating in Psychosocial Services (PA-YPS) receive community based services that facilitate childhood development and resiliency using a holistic approach that improves family functioning and increases child well-being and safety.

PA-YPS 9: Aftercare and Follow-Up

The agency and youth work together to develop an aftercare plan. Follow-up occurs whenever possible and appropriate.

Interpretation: While the decision to develop an aftercare plan is based on the wishes of the youth and their primary caregiver unless aftercare is mandated, the agency is expected to be strongly proactive with respect to aftercare planning.
 

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
    • Aftercare and follow-up procedures
No On-Site Evidence
    • Interview:
      1. Clinical or program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Individuals or families served
    • Review Case Records

  • PA-YPS 9.01

    The aftercare plan is developed sufficiently in advance of case closing to ensure an orderly transition.


  • PA-YPS 9.02

    Aftercare plans identify services needed or desired by the youth and their primary caregiver and specify steps for obtaining these services.


  • PA-YPS 9.03

    The agency takes the initiative to explore suitable resources and contact service providers when appropriate.


  • PA-YPS 9.04

    The agency follows up on the aftercare plan, as appropriate, when possible, and with the permission of the youth and primary caregiver.
     

    Interpretation: Reasons why follow-up may not be appropriate include, but are not limited to, cases where the person’s participation is involuntary.

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