Standards for Canadian organizations

2020 Edition

Counselling, Support, and Education Services (CA-CSE) 3: Intake

The organization's intake practices ensure that individuals and families receive prompt and responsive access to appropriate services.
2020 Edition

Currently viewing: COUNSELLING, SUPPORT, AND EDUCATION SERVICES (CA-CSE)

VIEW THE STANDARDS

Purpose

Individuals and families who participate in Counseling, Support, and Education Services identify and build on strengths, develop skills to manage situational change, access appropriate community support and resources, and improve functioning in daily activities at home, at work, and in the community.
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
  • In a few rare instances, urgent needs were not prioritized; or
  • For the most part, established timeframes are met; or
  • Culturally responsive assessments are the norm and any issues with individual staff members are being addressed through performance evaluations and training; 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
  • Urgent needs are often not prioritized; or 
  • Services are frequently not initiated in a timely manner; or
  • Applicants are not receiving referrals, as appropriate; or 
  • Assessment and reassessment timeframes are often missed; or
  • Assessments are sometimes not sufficiently individualized; 
  • Culturally responsive assessments are not the norm, and this is not being addressed in supervision or training; or
  • Several client records are missing important information; or
  • Client participation is inconsistent; or
  • Intake or assessment is done by another organization or referral source and no documentation and/or summary of required information is present in case record. 
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.,
  • There are no written procedures, or procedures are clearly inadequate or not being used; or
  • Documentation is routinely incomplete and/or missing.  
Self-Study EvidenceOn-Site EvidenceOn-Site Activities
  • Screening and intake procedures
  • Community resource and referral list
  • Interviews may include:
    1. Program director
    2. Relevant personnel
    3. Individuals or families served
  • Review logs, progress notes, or case records for documentation of services provided, as applicable

CA-CSE 3.01

Individuals and families are screened and informed about:
  1. how well their request matches the organization's services; and
  2. what services will be available, and when.
NA Another organization is responsible for screening, as defined in a contract.

Fundamental Practice

CA-CSE 3.02

Prompt, responsive intake practices:
  1. gather information necessary to identify critical service needs and/or determine when a more intensive service is necessary;
  2. give priority to urgent needs and emergency situations;
  3. support timely initiation of services; and
  4. provide for placement on a waiting list or referral to appropriate resources when individuals cannot be served or cannot be served promptly.

Fundamental Practice

CA-CSE 3.03

The organization has procedures in place to identify and respond to individuals and families at risk of suicide, self-injury, neglect, exploitation, and violence towards others.

Interpretation

If the program model does not necessitate individual risk screenings, organizations should, at a minimum, implement a program-wide screening to evaluate the potential risk of harm by or to persons served or others. Programs serving children, vulnerable adults, or individuals with a history of danger to self or others should conduct individual risk screenings. 
Examples: Organizations can respond to identified risk by connecting individuals and families to more intensive services; facilitating the development of a safety and/or crisis plan; and/or contacting emergency responders, 24-hour mobile crisis teams, emergency crisis intervention services, crisis stabilisation, or 24-hour crisis hotlines, as appropriate. 

CA-CSE 3.04

Case records, logs, or progress notes are maintained to document individual or group progress, as appropriate to the intervention.

Interpretation

A more formalized system of documentation may be necessary, depending on the service. For example, if the organization is establishing and tracking service goals, a service plan should be developed to monitor progress. Information that informs service delivery (e.g., screenings/assessments and service plans) should be maintained in the individual’s case record.
NA The organization provides services to community members or groups on a one-time or occasional basis.

NA The organization provides information and referral services only.