Standards for public agencies

2020 Edition

Administration and Management (PA-AM) 5: Service Array and Resource Development

The agency partners with stakeholders in the service delivery system to integrate, advocate for, and coordinate the array of services public and/or private providers deliver to meet the needs of the service population.


For state-administered agencies, implementation of this section will vary at the state and regional level. While many of the practices outlined in this section are primarily the responsibility of the state central office, regional offices are expected to work with community partners and the central office to better meet the needs of the communities they serve.
2020 Edition




 Through sound administration and effective management, the agency achieves its mission and strategic goals; assures appropriate use of public resources for the public good; and remains responsive to the needs of the communities it serves. 
Examples: Partnership in this context can include the pursuit of contracts when agencies are purchasing social or human services to meet an identified need within the service population.   

Examples: The service delivery system can include services and benefits provided by other federal or federally assisted programs serving the same population.
Full Implementation, Outstanding Performance
A rating of (1) indicates that the agency's practices fully meet the standard and reflect a high level of capacity.  
  • All elements or requirements outlined in the standard are evident in practice, with rare or no exceptions: exceptions do not impact service quality or agency performance. 
Substantial Implementation, Good Performance
A rating of (2) indicates that an agency's infrastructure and practices are basically sound but there is room for improvement.
  • The majority of the standards requirements have been met and the basic framework required by the standard has been implemented. 
  • Minor inconsistencies and not yet fully developed practices are noted; however, these do not significantly impact service quality or agency performance.

Partial Implementation, Concerning Performance
A rating of (3) indicates that the agency's observed infrastructure and/or practices require significant improvement.  

  • The agency has not implemented the basic framework of the standard but instead has in place only part of this framework.  
  • Omissions or exceptions to the practices outlined in the standard occur regularly, or practices are implemented in a cursory or haphazard manner.  
  • Service quality or agency functioning may be compromised.  
  • Capacity is at a basic level.
Unsatisfactory Implementation or Performance
A rating of (4) indicates that implementation of the standard is minimal or there is no evidence of implementation at all.  
  • The agency’s observed administration and management infrastructure and practices are weak or non-existent; or show signs of neglect, stagnation, or deterioration.
Self-Study EvidenceOn-Site EvidenceOn-Site Activities
County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
  • Service utilization goals 
  • Utilization data 
  • Access guidelines 
  • Procedures for monitoring and adjusting the service array including procedures for obtaining feedback from regions and line staff about regional service needs and the quality of services 
  • Resource development plan or relevant portions of strategic planning documents related to service array and resource development 
  • Procedures for working with intervening justice systems  
State Administered Agency (Regional Office)
  • No Self-Study Evidence
County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
  • Completed community assessment 
  • Evidence of collaboration with justice systems 
State Administered Agency (Regional Office)
  • No On-Site Evidence
County/Municipality Administered Agency, State Administered Agency (Central Office), or other Public Entity
  • Interviews may include:
    1. Agency leadership
    2. Contract management personnel
    3. Contracted providers
    4. Program field personnel
    5. Community stakeholders
    6. Persons served
State Administered Agency (Regional Office) 
  • Interviews may include:
    1. Regional Director
    2. Contracted providers
    3. Program field personnel
    4. Community stakeholders
    5. Persons served


PA-AM 5.01

Ease of entry into a system of highly accessible services is achieved through:
  1. access guidelines responsive to the service population; 
  2. staff that understand the services provided by other community providers;
  3. clearly articulated service utilization goals; and
  4. mechanisms for monitoring service utilization and addressing identified concerns.


For state agencies providing child and family services, standard implementation should include ensuring that services are accessible to families and children in all jurisdictions covered in the state’s Child and Family Services Plan.


PA-AM 5.02

The agency partners with local communities to continually improve the service array by:
  1. conducting periodic assessments of community need and existing resources;
  2. developing a plan for resource development to meet identified needs; and 
  3. monitoring the effectiveness of plan implementation.


Assessments of community need may be conducted by a third party and utilized by the agency to make resource development plans. 


For state-administered agencies, the assessment of community need and existing resources should include obtaining feedback from regions and frontline staff on regional service needs and the quality of services. 
NA State-administered agency regional office
Examples: Child and family services agencies can also use their performance on certain CFSR outcomes measures, such as ability to place siblings together, placement within the county/geographic region, and length of stay in care, to assess the need to modify the service array. 


PA-AM 5.03

When applicable, agencies work to develop effective partnerships with intervening justice systems, such as juvenile and family courts to:
  1. advocate for changes or improvements in the service array and other issues of mutual concern;
  2. evaluate mechanisms for ongoing collaboration and information-sharing; 
  3. improve the effectiveness of administrative operations and case outcomes; and
  4. develop MOUs for service provision, when needed.