WHO IS ACCREDITED?

Private Organization Accreditation

Family Services of Southeast Texas strengthens families through accessible, affordable counseling services and education for issues affecting family life, mental health and employment.  We also provide comprehensive domestic violence shelter and support services.
read more >>

VOLUNTEER TESTIMONIAL

Anita Paukovits

Volunteer Roles: Peer Reviewer

Being a COA peer reviewer has clearly played a role in my professional development and has made me a better administrator at my own agency as a result!  To be part of a professional network that is on the cutting edge of program, practice, fiscal responsibility, and insuring Best Practice across the field is an amazing opportunity.
read more>>

Purpose

Supervised Visitation and Exchange Services enable children to maintain connections with parents with whom they are not living by protecting the physical and emotional safety of the children and their families, including the safety of parents who have been victims of domestic violence.

CA-SVE 1: Service Philosophy

The program’s service philosophy: 
  1. articulates a commitment to keeping children and families, including victims of domestic violence, safe;
  2. promotes the fair and respectful treatment of all service recipients;
  3. recognizes that each family served presents unique risks, needs, and strengths;
  4. stipulates that the program will not represent service recipients;
  5. establishes that the program will not conduct evaluations or provide opinions or recommendations regarding treatment, custody, or access; 
  6. sets forth a logical approach for how services will meet families’ needs; and
  7. guides the development and implementation of services based on the best available evidence of effectiveness.

Interpretation: A program model or logic model can be a useful tool to help staff think systematically about how the program can make a measureable difference by drawing a clear connection between the service population’s needs, available resources, program interventions, program outputs, and desired outcomes. 

Interpretation: An exception to element (e) may occur during therapeutic visitation, where personnel may provide an opinion or recommendation regarding future treatment. Personnel providing therapeutic visitation will also typically conduct targeted assessments geared towards improving the parent-child relationship, but these assessments will not be considered to be evaluations that violate this standard. See CA-SVE 9.02 and 9.07 for more information regarding evaluations, opinions, and recommendations. 

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
  • Written service philosophy needs improvement or clarification; or
  • Procedures need strengthening; or
  • With few exceptions procedures are understood by staff and are being used; 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 rare instances required consent was not obtained; or
  • Monitoring procedures need minor clarification; 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.,
  • The written service philosophy needs significant improvement; or
  • Procedures and/or case record documentation need significant strengthening; or
  • Procedures are not well-understood or used appropriately; or
  • Documentation is inconsistent or in in some instances is missing and no corrective action has not been initiated; or
  • Required consent is often not obtained; or
  • A few personnel who are employing non-traditional or unconventional interventions have not completed training, as required; or
  • There are gaps in monitoring of interventions, as required; or
  • Policy on prohibited interventions does not include at least one of the required elements; or
  • Service philosophy is not clearly related to expressed mission or programs of the organization; 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.,
  • There is no written service philosophy; or
  • There are no written policy or 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 philosophy
No On-Site Evidence
    • Interview:
      1. Program director
      2. Personnel
      3. Service recipients
Copyright © 2019 Council on Accreditation. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy and Terms of Use