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 >>

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

Adoption Services establish a permanent family for children and youth awaiting adoption, and increase the well-being and functioning of birth parents, adoptive families, and adopted individuals.

CA-AS 4: Service Planning and Monitoring

Birth parents, youth, and prospective adoptive parents participate in the development and ongoing review of service plans that are the basis for delivery of services and support.

Interpretation: Service goals should be identified for birth parents, the child, and the prospective adoptive family. Generally, separate plans are developed for each involved party, but in some circumstances it may be appropriate to add the child’s goals to one of the other service plans.

Notes: The contract signed by prospective adoptive families can be considered a service plan.

NA The organization only provides Foster Care to Adoption Services.

NA The organization provides homestudy services only.

NA The organization provides post placement services only.

Rating Indicators
1
All elements or requirements outlined in the standard are evident in practice, as indicated by full implementation of the practices outlined in the Practice standards.
2
Practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g.,  
  • Minor inconsistencies and not yet fully developed practices are noted, however, these do not significantly impact service quality; or
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions procedures are understood by staff and are being used; or
  • For the most part, established timeframes are met; or
  • Proper documentation is the norm and any issues with individual staff members are being addressed through performance evaluations (CA-HR 6.02) and training (CA-TS 2.03); or
  • In a few instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated; or
  • Active client participation occurs to a considerable extent.
3
Practice requires significant improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards. Service quality or program functioning may be compromised; e.g.,
  • Procedures and/or case record documentation need significant strengthening; or
  • Procedures are not well-understood or used appropriately; or
  • Timeframes are often missed; or
  • In a number of instances client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated (CA-RPM 7.04); or
  • Quarterly reviews are not being done consistently; or
  • Level of care for some clients is inappropriate; or
  • Service planning is often done without full client participation; or
  • Appropriate family involvement is not documented; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or
  • Assessments are done by referral source and no documentation and/or summary of required information present in case record; or
  • One of the Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.
4
Implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all, as noted in the ratings for the Practice standards; e.g.,
  • No written procedures, or procedures are clearly inadequate or not being used; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or  
  • Two or more Fundamental Practice Standards received a rating of 3 or 4.

Table of Evidence

Self-Study Evidence On-Site Evidence On-Site Activities
    • Service planning and monitoring procedures
    • Documentation of case review
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Relevant personnel
      3. Parents
      4. Children
    • Review case records

  • CA-AS 4.01

    The service plan is based on the assessment, and includes:

    1. agreed upon goals, desired outcomes, and timeframes for achieving them;
    2. services, education, and supports to be provided, and by whom; and
    3. the service recipient’s signature.

  • CA-AS 4.02

    The worker and a supervisor, or a service or peer team, review each case to assess:

    1. service plan implementation;
    2. progress towards achieving service goals and desired outcomes; and
    3. the continuing appropriateness of agreed upon service goals.

    Interpretation: The review should occur:

    1. weekly for infants and monthly for all other children awaiting adoption;
    2. at least quarterly for prospective adoptive parents;
    3. according to milestones in the pregnancy of expectant parents; and
    4. at least quarterly for birth parents.

    Experienced workers may conduct reviews of their own cases. In such cases, the worker’s supervisor reviews a sample of the worker’s evaluations as per the requirements of the standard.


  • CA-AS 4.03

    The worker regularly reviews progress towards achievement of goals with birth parents, prospective adoptive families, and youth, and revisions to the goals and plans are signed.

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