Standards for Canadian organizations

2020 Edition

Out-of-School Time Services (CA-OST) 1: Child/Youth-Centered Logic Model

The organization implements a program logic model that describes how resources and program activities will support the achievement of positive outcomes.
2020 Edition

Currently viewing: OUT-OF-SCHOOL TIME SERVICES (CA-OST)

VIEW THE STANDARDS

Purpose

Children and youth who participate in Out-of-School Time programs gain the personal, social, emotional, and educational assets needed to support healthy development, increase well-being, and facilitate a successful transition through childhood and adolescence, and into adulthood.
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.

Logic models have been implemented for all programs and the organization has identified at least two outcomes for all its programs.
2
Practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement, as noted in the ratings for the Practice Standards; e.g.,  
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions, procedures are understood by staff and are being used; or
  • Logic models need improvement or clarification; or
  • Logic models are still under development for some of its programs, but are completed for all high-risk programs such as protective services, foster care, residential treatment, etc.; or
  • At least one client outcome has been identified for all of its programs; or
  • All but a few staff have been trained on use of therapeutic interventions and training is scheduled for the rest; or
  • With few exceptions the policy on prohibited interventions is understood by staff, or the written policy needs minor clarification.
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
  • Logic models need significant improvement; or
  • Logic models are still under development for a majority of programs; or
  • A logic model has not been developed for one or more high-risk programs; or
  • Outcomes have not been identified for one or more programs; or
  • Several staff have not been trained on the use of therapeutic interventions; or
  • There are gaps in monitoring of therapeutic interventions, as required; or
  • There is no process for identifying risks associated with use of therapeutic interventions; or
  • Policy on prohibited interventions does not include at least one of the required elements.
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.,
  • Logic models have not been developed or implemented; or
  • Outcomes have not been identified for any programs; or
  • There is no written policy or procedures for the use of therapeutic interventions; or 
  • Procedures are clearly inadequate or not being used; or
  • Documentation on therapeutic interventions is routinely incomplete and/or missing; or
  • There is evidence that clients have been harmed by inappropriate or unmonitored use of therapeutic interventions.
Self-Study EvidenceOn-Site EvidenceOn-Site Activities
  • Program logic model that includes a list of child/youth outcomes being measured
  • Policy for prohibited interventions
No On-Site Evidence
  • Interviews may include:
    1. Program director 
    2. Relevant personnel

CA-OST 1.01

A program logic model, or equivalent framework, identifies:
  1. needs the program will address;
  2. available human, financial, organizational, and community resources (i.e. inputs);
  3. program activities intended to bring about desired results;
  4. program outputs (i.e. the size and scope of services delivered); 
  5. desired outcomes (i.e. the changes you expect to see in service recipients); and
  6. expected long-term impact on the organization, community, and/or system.
Examples: Please see the W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide and COA’s PQI Tool Kit for more information on developing and using program logic models.

Examples: Information that may be used to inform the development of the program logic model includes, but is not limited to: 
  1. the needs of children, youth, families, and the community; and
  2. the best available evidence of effectiveness.

Examples: Desired outcomes can include, but are not limited to: improved social and emotional functioning; improved school attendance/participation; reduced behavioural problems; increased academic achievement; and increased aspirations for college and career. Logic models will often also include outputs and outcomes related to establishing a positive program climate that allows all children and youth to feel socially, emotionally, physically, and intellectually safe and supported, as addressed in CA-OST 5.08.

Fundamental Practice

CA-OST 1.02

Organization policy prohibits: 
  1. corporal punishment;
  2. the use of aversive stimuli;
  3. withholding nutrition or hydration;
  4. inflicting physical or psychological pain;
  5. the use of demeaning, shaming, or degrading language or activities;
  6. overly punitive restrictions;
  7. forced physical exercise to eliminate behaviours;
  8. punitive work assignments;
  9. punishment by peers; and
  10. group punishment or discipline for individual behaviour.