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.
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 and training; or
In a few instances, client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated; or
With few exceptions, staff work with persons served, when appropriate, to help them receive needed support, access services, mediate barriers, etc.; or
Active client participation occurs to a considerable extent.
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 several instances, client or staff signatures are missing and/or not dated; or
Quarterly reviews are not being done consistently; or
Level of care for some clients is clearly 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
Individual staff members work with persons served, when appropriate, to help them receive needed support, access services, mediate barriers, etc., but this is the exception.
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.
Service planning and monitoring procedures
No On-Site Evidence
Interviews may include:
Review case records
An assessment-based service plan is developed in a timely manner with the full participation of the survivor, and other non-offending family members as appropriate and with the consent of the survivor, and includes:
agreed upon goals, desired outcomes, and timeframes for achieving them;
services and supports to be provided, and by whom;
possibilities for maintaining and strengthening family relationships and other informal social networks;
procedures for expedited service planning when crisis or urgent need is identified; and
the survivor’s signature.
Although personnel should help identify available services and evaluate options, survivors should be the primary planners of their goals and objectives, and have the right to make their own decisions and decline services.
The organization works in active partnership with survivors to:
assume a service coordination role, as appropriate, when the need has been identified and no other organization has assumed that responsibility;
ensure that they receive appropriate advocacy support;
assist with access to the full array of services to which they are eligible;
mediate barriers to services within the service delivery system; and
prepare community providers to meet survivors’ needs.
For service members, veterans, and their families, community providers may include military or Veterans Affairs providers. The service plan should clearly outline which services will be provided on the installation or Veterans Affairs facility, when appropriate to the needs and wishes of the survivor. This population is often unsure of the services to which they are entitled and how to navigate military care systems. The clinician should take an active role in navigating these care systems when possible.
The worker and a supervisor, or a clinical, service, or peer team, review the case bi-weekly when providing residential services and quarterly when providing non-residential services, or more frequently depending on the needs of survivors, to assess:
service plan implementation;
progress toward achieving service goals and desired outcomes; and
the continuing appropriateness of the agreed upon service goals.
When experienced workers are conducting reviews of their own cases, the worker’s supervisor must review a sample of the worker’s evaluations as per the requirements of the standard.
The worker and survivor:
review progress toward achievement of agreed upon service goals; and