Welcome to the Council on Accreditation (COA) blog post series Profiles in Accreditation! 

The organizations that COA accredits are diverse in both the communities they serve and their reasons for seeking accreditation (or reaccreditation).  Profiles in Accreditation will explore the accreditation experience through the perspective of these organizations. Through them, we can discover the value of accreditation, best practices, lessons learned, and recommendations.

Organization profile

Name:  Family Service Association

Location: Lincoln, Nebraska

First accredited: 1998

Latest reaccredition: 2019

Snapshot: Family Service is a nonprofit organization that has been providing services to the families of Lincoln, Nebraska for 125 years.  They recently updated their mission to be “Helping Families Thrive.” Currently, Family Service provides families with four programs:  Women, Infants, and Children; Child Care Food; Behavioral Health; and Out-of-School Time, which includes before- and after-school care, as well as summer care. 

Two of Family Service’s four programs are accredited with COA: Behavioral Health and Out-of-School Time.  Their Out-of-School Time program is their largest program.  It consists of 14 before- and after-school care programs and seven Community Learning Center programs.  Their Behavioral Health program provides licensed therapists to 22 schools within Lincoln Public Schools and six schools in Saunders County.  It also includes of a Community Response Program, which connects families with community resources that will support families to meet their goals and strengthen relationships within the community.

Interview with Family Service Lincoln

For this Profiles in Accreditation post, we asked Director of Strategic Initiatives Jessica Radford, Ed.D. to share her experience at an organization that has been accredited by COA for the last ten years. Jessica told us how reaccreditation has helped drive the organization’s quality improvement forward. She also shared how she appreciated how COA accreditation felt not like an evaluation via checklist, but an effort from a team.

COA: What were some of the drivers for seeking reaccreditation this latest time around?

JR: It was important for our organization to seek reaccreditation to learn how quality programs and services are defined and to help us identify areas of growth.  All our Management Team was new within the past two years.  Reaccreditation provided us with the opportunity to really dig into the organization and its practices.  We learned what was done historically, what was currently being done, and how we could improve it. 

Accreditation helped us to evaluate and update practices that are oftentimes overlooked. Some of these included safety and risk assessments, HR audits, and an annual review of policies and procedures.  It also helped us evaluate our system for communicating with staff and involving stakeholders.  Sometimes we forget to evaluate our common organization practices and their effectiveness because we just keep doing things the way they’ve always been done.  Accreditation helped us hone in on these practices and improve them.

COA: What about the COA accreditation process made you decide to partner with us?

JR: Our organization has been accredited with COA for the last ten years, and the staff take great pride in this accreditation.  COA holds their organizations to high standards and has a rigorous accreditation process.  So it was important for Family Service to continue this accreditation with COA for consistency, as well as to ensure we were providing good services to employees and families.

"Accreditation helped us to evaluate and update practices that are oftentimes overlooked."

COA:How did you engage and communicate the value of accreditation to the entire organization during the accreditation process?

JR: We held a kick-off meeting where we brought everybody together and talked about the importance of accreditation, the process, and the role they would play.  We provided updates through emails and meetings.  When we received our accreditation, we had a cookie celebration and invited the board and stakeholders.

COA:What do you see as the main benefit of COA accreditation?

JR: The main benefit for us through our COA accreditation was the framework for evaluating and improving the organization and its practices.  Sometimes it can feel overwhelming, not knowing where to begin with improvements or trying to identify what needs to be improved.  COA provided a very thorough framework for us to follow, allowing us to assess the organization and its practices comprehensively so that we could target areas to work on.  The standards also provided guidance for how to make improvements and what best practices are for nonprofit organizations.

"Our organization has been accredited with COA for the last ten years, and the staff take great pride in accreditation."

COA: What about the accreditation process do you feel was most valuable to your organization?

JR: All of it. 😊

The standards were easy to understand and provided clear guidance.  The staff at COA were very responsive and helpful.  They always responded within a day anytime I emailed or called them, and they always had an answer for me.  They were also very willing to take the time to help me and make sure I understood the process and standards. 

The feedback given to us from our on-site reviewers was also very valuable and appreciated.  For example, the on-site reviewers talked with us about the training of the organization. Following this conversation, we purchased an online training system and began implementing it.  The system communicates with staff, tracks training completion, and provides lots of training options to staff. 

COA: What did you like most about the accreditation process?

JR: I liked all the guidance that was provided through the accreditation process.  The standards were very easy to understand and provided lots of explanations through the Interpretations.  The staff at COA were so knowledgeable and helpful.  The Intensive Accreditation Training was full of great information and guidance.  Our on-site reviewers provided lots of great feedback on areas we can improve.  The process really felt like a team effort.

COA: What was the biggest challenge during the accreditation process?

JR: Organizing all the evidence.  😊

I found it helpful to organize the standards and evidence into tables.  I put together tables with three columns:  Standard, Required Evidence, and Family Service Evidence.  This helped me to keep track of what document went with what standard and to be sure I provided evidence for each of the areas of Required Evidence.  It helped me organize it into more of a checklist.

COA: How has COA reaccreditation impacted operational success?

JR: The reaccreditation has really helped drive our quality improvement forward.  It has given us specific areas to improve on and helped us set goals and objectives.  It’s only been a few months since we received our accreditation and we have already made some great improvements.

Because of our accreditation, we have worked to improve the training we provide our employees.  We have created an onboarding process which includes some safety trainings and some behavior trainings.  We have created an annual training plan which includes monthly safety trainings for all staff and bi-monthly supervision trainings for all supervisors.  The system we have implemented tracks trainings completed by staff in one on-line system.  This has helped us to keep track of trainings as well as identify training needs for staff.  This has not only improved our training program, but also the culture at our organization.  Staff now feel that safety and training is a priority to Family Service.

We have also become more aware and thoughtful about reviewing our practices on a regular basis.  We have implemented annual HR audits, stakeholder meetings and surveys to get feedback on our programs, annual reviews of policies and procedures to make sure they reflect what we are doing, quarterly safety checks and risk assessment reports, and improved data collection to help us analyze practices and programs.

"The reaccreditation has really helped drive our quality improvement forward."

COA: What are the top three pieces of advice or tips that you would give to an organization considering or currently undertaking the accreditation process for the first time?

JR: The coordinator of the process needs to be a very organized person.  A large part of the process is collecting and organizing evidence to be submitted.  If the person is already good at organizing projects and information, setting deadlines, and delegating duties, this will make the process less overwhelming.

Use your COA team.  Do not be afraid to ask questions.  Everybody on our COA team was so helpful.  It felt more like a team effort instead of an evaluation and checklist.

Use the process as an opportunity to identify areas of growth.  Do not try to look perfect for COA.  Be honest about your practices and procedures.  This will help you use the process to identify areas of growth and make improvements.

"It felt more like a team effort instead of an evaluation and checklist."

COA: Are there any other learnings or insights that you’d like to share?

JR: I cannot say enough good things about our accreditation team.  Mary Glenn was amazing, and I couldn’t have done it without her.  She was always so helpful and knowledgeable.  Even when I felt overwhelmed or like we were doing things wrong, she helped guide me and reassure me that we were on the right track with things. 

Our on-site reviewers were so pleasant and knowledgeable as well.  They did a wonderful job at the introductory meeting explaining accreditation and the process to our board and staff.  All our staff enjoyed having them on site and talking with them.  Their feedback during the exit meeting was so valuable as well.  It really gave us areas to improve on. 

When we received our final accreditation report, nothing was a surprise because everybody had been so transparent through the process.  It was really a team effort to get our accreditation, and COA was a big part of that team.

Thank you, Family Service Lincoln!

We would like to thank Jessica for her thoughtful insights into the reaccreditation process, and acknowledge the entire Family Service Lincoln board and team for embracing accreditation and collectively contributing to the promotion of best practices. Thank you, all!

Do you have an accreditation story to tell? Click here to share it. You could be the next organization we feature!

Since Congress passed  the Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA) in February 2018, stakeholders across the U.S. have been working to maximize the opportunity posed by this tremendous reform to our child welfare system. To ensure that children and families reap the positive benefits of FFPSA, service-providing agencies, social workers, child welfare officials, accrediting bodies, policy makers, and advocacy organizations have been rigorously planning for implementation, all while trying to keep up-to-date on the latest guidance and policy. 

Looking for an FFPSA 101? Watch our informational video.

As COA began working with service providers impacted by FFPSA, we found that organizations were not only interested in information about the accreditation process, but also resources relevant to the larger scope of FFPSA provisions. That’s why we created the COA FFPSA Resource Center, a hub of FFPSA-related content including federal guidance, tools and resources, accreditation information, events and trainings, and news. 

We are continually evolving the website as new guidance and/or policy is released and as states move forward with implementation. Have a resource, article, or tool that you’d like to see posted on the Resource Center? We’d love to hear from you! Reach out to us by email at PublicPolicy@coanet.org. 

Just starting to peruse the site and not sure where to start? Fear not! We’ve created a list of 5 helpful resources to get you started. 

1. Federal Requirement Comparison: QRTP and PRTF

From the Building Bridges Initiative

With the support of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Building Bridges created this comparison to assist providers in understanding the federal requirements set forth for Qualified Residential Treatment Programs (QRTP) and Psychiatric Residential Treatment Facilities (PRTF). The information is organized in a table by requirement component, so that readers can do a line-by-line comparison of each program’s respective requirements. Though QRTPs and PRTFs have some similarities, these programs were created and defined separately in federal law in order to establish varying levels of care for children and youth with significant behavioral health needs. 

Building Bridges is a national initiative working to identify and promote practices and policies that will create strong coordinated partnerships and collaborations between families, youth, community- and residentially-based treatment and service providers, advocates, and policy makers to ensure that comprehensive mental health services and supports are available to improve the lives of young people and their families.

View the comparison here. 

2. Responsibly Defining Candidacy within the Context of FFPSA: 5 Principles to Consider

From the Center for the Study of Social Policy

The Center for the Study of Social Policy created this brief of guiding principles for states to consider as they work to identify a definition of foster care candidacy that fits within the context of their state policies and prevention service array. 

FFPSA defines the term ‘child who is a candidate of foster care’ to mean “a child who is identified in a prevention plan under section 471(e)(4)(A) as being at imminent risk of entering foster care…but who can remain safely in the child’s home or in kinship placement as long as services of programs specified in section 471(e)(1) that are necessary to prevent the entry of the child into foster care are provided” (Sec. 50711). This means each state will be responsible for defining candidacy in their State IV-E Plan, which will be submitted to the Children’s Bureau. State definitions of “candidacy” will be extremely important in deciding which children and families will be served under FFPSA prevention services. This resource provides a guiding methodology for state policymakers in creating that definition and assists in considering the way such a policy will impact children and families in their state.  

View the resource here. 

3. Program Standards for Treatment Family Care

From the Family Focused Treatment Association (FFTA)

As we learn more about the impact that FFPSA implementation will have, it has become clear that there is a need to bolster the continuum of child welfare services offered to meet the needs of children and families. Treatment Family Care (TFC), also known as Treatment Foster Care (TFC), has emerged as a leading service to meet the behavioral needs of children in home-settings rather than residential care. The strict parameters established around residential placement under FFPSA puts a spotlight on TFC as a service that can maintain a residential level of care while keeping children and youth in a home-setting. 

Though TFC services are provided across the country, federal guidance related to funding opportunities, practice standards, and program oversight has never been issued. Fortunately, Congress is currently considering the Treatment Family Care Services Act (HR3649 and S1880), which will provide states with a clear definition and guidance on federal TFC standards under the Medicaid program and other federal funding streams. This clarification will promote accountability for states offering TFC, support FFPSA implementation, promote appropriate TFC services for reimbursement, and drive personnel training and standards. 

FFTA first published their own Program Standards for TFC in 1991 to define the model and set parameters for the field. In 2019, FFTA published the revised 5th edition, which provides several updates to the previous edition and in particular approaches the standards from a broader perspective of Treatment Family Care. This is in response to the changing needs of children, youth, and families; programmatic changes; and service expansions impacting TFC services. In particular, the new edition expands the view of TFC by integrating a focus on children living with kin. This inclusion was necessitated by an increasing expectation to meet the treatment needs of children in kin settings, stemmed by the belief that living with family can minimize the trauma associated with separation from parents.

View the FFTA’s program standards here. 

4. Title IV-E Prevention Services Clearinghouse website

From the U.S. Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

The Title IV- E Prevention Services Clearinghouse was established in accordance with FFPSA by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Its goal is to conduct an objective, rigorous, and transparent review of research on programs and services intended to support children and families and prevent foster care placements. Programs submitted to the Clearinghouse are rated as “well-supported”, “supported”, “promising practice”, or as “not meeting criteria”. The initial programs that have been rated include mental health services, substance abuse prevention and treatment services, in-home parent skill-based programs, and kinship navigator programs. 

Ratings will help determine programs’ eligibility for reimbursement through Title IV-E funding. The Clearinghouse continues to be updated as new services are reviewed and rated, those interested in receiving real time notifications of updates can sign up here. 

Access the Title IV-E Prevention Services Clearinghouse here. 

5. National and state FFPSA news

From our FFPSA Resource Center

Implementation of FFPSA will mark the largest reform to our national child welfare system in decades. Since FFPSA passed in February 2018, there have been hundreds of news outlets reporting on the many components of reform at the national and state level, including information on implementation, related legislation, funding opportunities, service delivery, and more. The large scope of provisions can make it difficult to find the information that is relevant to your role in implementing FFPSA. That’s why COA created a FFPSA news round-up, updated regularly with content published related to state-specific activities and national news related to FFPSA. 

State-level news can be viewed here and national-level news can be found here. Want to get alerts when important updates are published? Sign up for our mailing list. 

We hope these resources will support you and your agency in learning more about the provisions of FFPSA. We would like to thank all of the organizations that have produced content to assist our field with this important legislation. 

Though we’ve identified these five resources to get you started, we encourage you to continue your research and explore all of the information available at www.coafamilyfirst.org. And since we couldn’t pick just five…

Bonus resource!

Accreditor Comparison Guide

Needing to pursue national accreditation as a result of FFPSA? The first step is to find an accreditor that is the right fit for your organization. To support agencies in choosing an accreditor, we created a comparison guide that details the differences between the COA, CARF, and JC accreditation processes.

Download the comparison here.

Watch a special message from Jody Levison-Johnson, COA’s new President & CEO, and then read on below to hear more about her thoughts on what’s next for COA.

TRANSCRIPT

Hi.  I’m Jody Levison-Johnson, the new president and CEO of the Council on Accreditation, or as some in the field like to call us, “COA (Kō-Ah).”  I wanted to take a few moments to introduce myself and share a bit about the future of COA.

My background includes work in direct service organizations, oversight and funding entities, and national policy and advocacy arenas. Leading COA is the realization of my lifelong dream to shape the human services field and profoundly impact the lives of the people in need. 

And the timing of my arrival here could not have been better.

This is truly an exciting time at COA. We are changing the field by helping organizations offer services of the highest possible quality to their clients and their communities.

For a long time and for many people, accreditation has just been another box to check, a means to an end to ensure eligibility for funding streams or to meet regulatory requirements. But it is so much more than that. 

We hope to elevate–both within COA and among our accredited organizations–the true value of accreditation. That value is to the end user, the consumers—the children, youth, families and adults–who rely on the services that our organizations provide.

Our mission is simple: To help organizations improve the quality and effectiveness of their services by aligning with the best practices established in our standards.

Throughout our more than forty-year history, COA has regularly evolved both our standards and processes to meet the changing needs of the field.  This evolution will continue as we move towards 2020. Look for more details on that in the coming months—we have some exciting updates just around the corner.

While we continue to evolve as an organization, one thing remains constant: COA’s unwavering dedication to supporting you so that you can best support your community and those that you serve.

Thanks to each and every one of you. We are so grateful for the work that you do every day on behalf of COA and the communities that you serve.  Here’s to continued collaboration and success.

Notes from Jody

As I approach the six month mark at COA, I can confidently say that my excitement for our work has never been greater. I tease it a little in this video but want to encourage you again to keep an eye out for messages from us in the coming months—there is a lot to share, and I truly believe it will be valuable for you and your organizations.

Engagement with the broader human services community is the foundation of COA, from the critical input we get on our standards, to our peer-based review system, to the important partnerships with our sponsoring and supporting organizations, funders, and regulators. I have spent the last few months visiting with some of the COA community to learn how we can better support you and your important work. These meetings have provided me with an opportunity to hear about the profound impact COA is making on the field, and ultimately on those being served by our accredited organizations. Each meeting has also provided food for thought on areas for development–things COA can consider doing to continue to increase the value of our work.

That is our goal with the coming updates: to continue to make accreditation as valuable for our organizations and impactful for our communities as it can be. As always, we want to provide you with a framework that serves you so that you can best serve your communities. Because community is such an important part of COA, it is my hope that you will continue to work with us through this process, giving us feedback so that together, we can drive the field forward.

A big thank you to those who have met with me already and shared your thoughts–it has been invaluable. I hope to continue to keep in touch and look forward to meeting more of you in the future.

I am grateful to lead an organization with such a dynamic, diverse, and passionate staff, a robust team of talented and dedicated volunteers, and a versatile array of accredited organizations – all of whose commitment to quality is unwavering.

Here’s to what’s next.

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

“How Do You PQI?”

This is phrase that COA came up with a few years ago to introduce our newest toolkit. As an accreditation insider, we think it’s a clever phrase in that it conveys that:

(We also like that it rolls off the tongue easily, unlike the word “accreditation.”)

Unfortunately, not everyone is an accreditation insider. We love our acronyms at COA, and use them everywhere–in our standards, in our process, in our technology (shout out to the VIP portal!). But acronyms and jargon can be confusing to anyone not in the know, and create barriers to understanding. “PQI” is no different.

So what is PQI, you ask?

Good question–and a common question we’re asked when staffing COA’s exhibit booth at a conference. The conversation usually goes something like this:

Inquiring person: What is PQI?

Us: It’s the foundation of the accreditation process.

Inquiring Person: Yes, but what does it mean?

Us: “Performance and Quality Improvement.” It’s our name for Quality Improvement or Quality Assurance.

Inquiring person: Thanks. What’s “Quality Improvement”?

Us: On a basic level, we like to say that a PQI system is collecting data about your work, analyzing it, making course-corrections based on the data, and then tracking to see if those changes are working.

Then we usually see a glimmer of understanding in their eyes.  We give the inquiring person our PQI Toolkit postcard, and hope that it makes its way to the Quality Assurance/Data Nerd at their agency.

Based on our conversations with stakeholders, in-process organizations, and peers, we at COA know that PQI is can be a conceptual, difficult-to-grasp concept. We also know that agencies need a lot of help developing their PQI systems. This is why we talk about PQI a lot, and why we create trainings and tools to help.

One long-awaited tool is a high-level introduction to PQI for anyone new to the concept.  Now when we’re manning the exhibit table and get asked “What is PQI?”, we are thrilled to be able to reply:  

“Check out our PQI whiteboard video!”

 
 

Transcript

The most effective social service organizations are those that have been accredited to meet the highest standards of quality.

For more than 40 years, the nonprofit Council on Accreditation has partnered with health and human service organizations globally to improve outcomes by developing, applying, and promoting accreditation standards.

COA’s Performance and Quality Improvement standards, or PQI, require organizations to generate and review organization-wide data to establish performance targets that improve services and outcomes for all stakeholders. It’s a comprehensive process that includes working with the entire organization instead of assigning the responsibility for quality improvement to just a few individuals.

Information generated by the PQI system is used to:

The organization reviews findings and feedback while taking action to:

Become accredited and reach a higher standard. Visit COA’s website to learn more or to get started today!

And hopefully now you think the phrase “How Do You PQI?” is clever, too.

Want to dig deeper into PQI? Check out our comprehensive PQI Toolkit.

 

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Your organization has decided to embark on the journey of pursuing accreditation! This commitment can invoke many sentiments—happiness, anticipation, fear, anxiety, and maybe even a splash of frustration. These are all normal feelings. The accreditation process is a major project with a myriad of components. One way to be successful in your accreditation work is to use a project management approach, as it is critical to divide the required work into smaller, manageable steps. Here is a handy, step-by-step guide you can use to conceptualize the tasks that are on the horizon.

Work styles & organizational culture

COA has an organization-wide accreditation model. This means that not only are programs being reviewed, but also the administrative divisions as well. Getting many colleagues involved in the accreditation process will help the organization manage the workload and focus on developing, updating, or sustaining practices that are ultimately in the best interest of the consumers served. 

People have different personalities, which includes varied preferences and approaches to their work responsibilities. There are those who are process-oriented people that do a really great job poking holes in plans and asking questions that may not have been considered. Then there are staff who can reflect and acknowledge the progress that has been made within the organization through that point in time. Knowing some of these characteristics and preferences will be helpful in thinking about who should handle different aspects of the work.

How and why the organization is choosing to pursue accreditation is essential to framing the work that lies ahead. Even if the organization is mandated to achieve accreditation, what the organization hopes to accomplish through this process is valuable for all to hear. Ask yourself: What is the message we will convey to our board, advisory group, staff, consumers, and other relevant stakeholders about what accreditation means for the organization and its future? People want something they can believe in, something that resonates with them, so taking time to reflect and think about the “why” behind this journey is an opportunity to capitalize on building momentum.

Accreditation workload – forming the structure

COA accreditation includes all aspects of the organization’s administration and service delivery operations.  There are three types of standards: administration and management, service delivery administration, and service. Most organizations will have at least ten standard sections to review based on the three categories.  It is essential to have multiple staff managing different standard sections, because no one staff member will have all the answers (and that is a good thing)!

A question we often hear from organizations is “How will we manage the accreditation work?” You must consider whether your organizational structure serves as a sufficient framework to review the standards. This means that those individuals responsible for particular divisions would delegate tasks to staff within their department. For example, the director of human resources would review the human resources management standard section and assign tasks as needed to his/her staff. Similarly, program directors would follow the same process to review service standard areas.

Another option for managing the work includes the creation of functional work groups, which includes assembling teams with individuals from different departments and/or programs to review one or more standard sections. For example, an administrative work group can be formed to review multiple standard areas including risk management, administrative service environment, ethical practice, etc. This type of work group would include an interdisciplinary team of quality improvement, program, information technology, and other staff as needed.

Decision-making authority and flow of communication

Once a decision is made on whether to use the structural work groups, functional work groups, or a hybrid of the two, the organization must consider the decision-making authority. As teams begin to work on reviewing the standards against current practices, you may find that policies, procedures, and protocols may need to be developed or modified. The organization must be clear on who has the authority to implement new procedures and practices. 

Typically, if hierarchical work groups are used, the head of the department or program would be responsible for managing the approval process. Larger organizations may have a chief operations officer or director, and that person may be responsible for final approval. In smaller organizations, decision-making authority may be the sole responsibility of the executive director. In functional work groups, the decision-making authority may be less transparent, so the organization should establish the process for preliminary and final approval of procedures and new protocols. This will be particularly important once staff begin doing the actual work that is part of the Self-Study and Site Visit phases of the accreditation process.

Regardless of the structure chosen to manage the work, the individual responsible for overseeing the accreditation process needs to ensure that work groups and teams routinely provide information and updates to them. Sharing information and progress with the leadership team is a must, especially if the accreditation lead is not a part of said team.

Pro-tip_ Create a core accreditation team that the accreditation lead can work directly with to stay abreast of where all the work groups are with meeting deliverables. (1).png

Responsibilities associated with stages of accreditation process

There are six stages in the accreditation process, each with different responsibilities. Below are some salient tasks for which the organization is responsible.

Application & agreement

The application and agreement phase of the process is an opportunity for the organization to assess the cost of accreditation and explore the service standard sections that may be relevant to the programs provided. Once the organization has decided to pursue COA accreditation, the accreditation agreement is signed and the work begins.

Intake

Think of the intake stage as COA’s opportunity to acquire information from the organization on all your programs and locations in which they operate. When highlighting the scope of services at each program, be concise. COA uses this information to determine the appropriate service standard for each program. Do not spend many months in this stage of the process – it will prolong the assignment of service standards. The organization’s Site Visit will not be scheduled until all program documentation has been submitted to COA.

Pro tip: If your organization is a nonprofit, send out save-the-date invitations to key board members for the morning of the Site Visit start date. This way they can block off the time well in advance to minimize scheduling conflicts.

Self-Study

When the organization enters the self-study stage of the accreditation process, all standard sections have been assigned and the due dates for the Preliminary Self-Study and Self-Study have been scheduled, along with the start date for the Site Visit.

During this phase of the accreditation process, the organization should implement the structure for managing the standards review. Work groups should conduct an assessment of its current practices, policies and procedures against the COA standards. A self-assessment helps the organization to know where it needs to prioritize its time and resources.

Pro-tip_ Set internal deadline in advance of the due dates established in the Intake stage. This will give you considerable time to review and update documentation prior to submission to COA.

Site Visit

Once the Self-Study has been submitted, the accreditation work groups should begin compiling documentation to have available during the Site Visit. Reserve a meeting room for the Peer Review team to use while they are onsite for the duration of the Site Visit. All documentation should be clearly labelled by standard section, including the relevant core concept standard. The information the Peer Review team will evaluate can be available in paper or electronic format.

Pro tip: Have all required onsite documentation available during the Sunday afternoon case record review.

Building and sustaining momentum

If you are following the steps as listed, by now the “why” behind accreditation has already been established. An inventory of the strengths of staff has been conducted, and the process for managing the accreditation work is in place. Now the organization needs to formally roll out this significant initiative and keep staff engaged throughout the entire process. 

Set a kick-off date

A kick-off event, such as an all-staff meeting, is a great way to launch the accreditation work. Use this time as an opportunity for the executive director to explain to staff why the organization is pursuing accreditation and why it is valuable. It is an opportunity to inform staff that pursuing accreditation can provide professional development and team building.

Pro-tip_ hosting a kickoff week with quizzes, trivia, freebies, and food can build momentum and excitement about COA accreditation!

Themes and activities

Knowing the “why” behind the organization’s pursuit of accreditation may not be enough for some. For those who are charged with managing the accreditation process, consider ways to make different aspects of the work fun and exciting. Television shows, sports, movies, are all options that may be suitable to connect accreditation work groups. Visual display boards serve as a reminder and can foster healthy competition within the organization.

Pro tip: Don't forget to celebrate small and large milestones! Pizza, tacos, casual dress days, and compensatory time are all welcomed.

Final thoughts

The accreditation process can be overwhelming —there are many aspects that need to be managed. Hopefully, your creative juices are flowing with ways to make this organization-wide initiative manageable and fun. Remember, to get others involved, align the work with the strengths of staff and challenge the organization to always strive to be better.

Been through the accreditation process before? Share your thoughts on some things you wish you had known before you started the accreditation process. Recently completed the accreditation process? Let us know some of your pro tips that helped your organization through!

Welcome to the first in a new series of blog posts entitled Profiles in Accreditation! 

The organizations that COA accredits are diverse in both the communities they serve and their reasons for seeking accreditation (or reaccreditation).  Profiles in Accreditation will explore the accreditation experience through the perspective of these organizations. Through them, we can discover the value of accreditation, best practices, lessons learned, and recommendations.

Organization profile

Name: Lad Lake

Locations: Milwaukee and Dousman, Wisconsin

First Accredited: 2014

Reaccredited: 2018 

Snapshot: Lad Lake has been evolving to meet the needs of Wisconsin’s most vulnerable children for 170 years.  Serving more than 1,200 youth annually, the organization’s 300 staff accomplish its mission of “guiding the growth of at-risk youth to reach their potential and live responsibly” through four major program commitments: two residential care centers for youth who have experienced trauma from the child welfare and juvenile justice systems; alternative education for students with special learning needs; independent living services for youth “aging out” of the foster care system; and community services such as in-home therapy, specialized mentoring, and supervised visitation for parents and children. 

Interview with Lad Lake

For our first Profiles in Accreditation post, we asked Lad Lake President and CEO Daniel O. Magnuson, MA, MSW to share his thoughts on his organization’s journey through reaccreditation. He emphasized how accreditation provided a framework for operational success, as well as the importance of having the entire organization–including the board–engaged with the process.

COA: Why was it important to Lad Lake to seek accreditation initially?

DM: We sought our initial accreditation in preparation for the retirement of a long-serving CEO; we wanted to position Lad Lake for improved impact and financial sustainability.

COA: What were some of the drivers for seeking reaccreditation?

DM: As we implemented the initial accreditation plan in 2014-2015, we also completed a comprehensive strategic planning initiative.  COA’s accreditation framework helped us to focus and look at activities on an organizational level, which made the execution of our strategic plan more effective. Reaccreditation affirmed our internal sense that we were making significant progress in all domains of our performance, and in a dramatic fashion!

Additionally, accreditation provides Lad Lake with a competitive advantage with many of our stakeholders.  This will be increasingly important as the federal Families First Prevention Services Act is implemented.

"Accreditaiton is not 'just another thing' on the plate of busy managers and leaders. Rather, it is our primary frame of reference for accomplishing our work."

COA: What about the COA accreditation process made you decide to partner with us?

DM: Our partnership with the Alliance for Strong Families and Communities and our executive leadership’s deep connection with the Alliance network made COA the obvious choice for accreditation.  It is the “gold standard” for our industry.

COA: What do you see as the main benefit of COA accreditation?

DM: COA accreditation provides Lad Lake with a framework for (and the discipline to stay focused on) our strategic priorities. It helps us to learn together, to adjust our approaches to achieve our intended impact, and to strengthen our financial sustainability in the face of changing market conditions.   

COA: Were there any unexpected results after completing the Self Study and PQI process?

DM: The primary unexpected result was the degree to which Lad Lake’s management teams embraced COA accreditation, especially reaccreditation. The standards, the policies, and the procedures developed in our self-study and PQI processes have, for the most part, become the way Lad Lake does business.  Accreditation is not “just another thing” on the plate of busy managers and leaders.  Rather, it is our primary frame of reference for accomplishing our work. 

Additionally, the COA accreditation and reaccreditation processes were completed in the face of very serious financial challenges.  These challenges required the development and execution of a difficult turnaround plan.  Rather than distracting our leadership from that plan, COA accreditation provided a disciplined process to focus our attention on the key drivers for our success. 

As CEO, I do not believe our financial turnaround, improved quality and financial sustainability could have been possible without the discipline of thought offered by accreditation and reaccreditation.

"After years of financial losses, Lad Lake has moved to a position of financial sustainability."

COA: Why was it important for you to have a high level of stakeholder engagement across your organization?

DM: One element of our organizational vision is to fulfill our mission with an “aligned, engaged, and happy workforce.”  This can be a tall order in an industry with such challenging work and shoe-string budgets!  The COA process, in concert with a clear strategic plan, helped us to articulate what we wanted employees to align and engage with.  It also helped us to communicate those directions across our organization.  This has grounded Lad Lake’s daily activities in a larger vision of improving the lives of youth and families in need.

COA: How has COA accreditation/reaccreditation impacted operational success at Lad Lake?

DM: Accreditation and reaccreditation has been transformative for Lad Lake.  In concert with our updated strategic plan, COA provided a framework to operationalize and monitor our process improvements across all domains of our organization, from impact to human capital to financial sustainability to governance. A host of key performance indicators focused the work of the board, management, and staff. 

The results have been extraordinary.  All our programs now share common goals in safety, health, social support, and hopeful futures.  Process improvement is closely tracked with client feedback and validated assessment methodologies.  Findings inform refinements in program design.  Risk management in many key areas has dramatically improved.  After years of financial losses, Lad Lake has moved to a position of financial sustainability.

"Accreditation is so closely aligned with our strategic priorities and key performance indicators that our board of directors discusses it at every meeting."

COA: How did you communicate the value of accreditation and engage the entire organization during the accreditation process?

DM: We did so in various ways. Firstly, many managers and supervisors were (and are still) involved in various teams devoted to quality improvement and risk management.  Internal communication methods such as staff newsletters, email communication, and face-to-face meetings helped to extend the accreditation story to team members. Accreditation at Lad Lake is so closely aligned with our strategic priorities and key performance indicators that our board of directors discusses it at every meeting.

COA: At the board level, what were the driving factors for seeking accreditation?

DM: The board was particularly interested in accreditation to help it better understand and address the impact of the organization’s services on youth and families. The pending retirement of a CEO and the prospect of a new CEO coming aboard added extra urgency to Lad Lake’s initial pursuit of it.

COA: What was the biggest challenge for the board during the accreditation process?

DM: The board fully embraced accreditation.  They understood its value and likened the process to quality initiatives and accreditation in their respective industries.  Linking accreditation to our strategic planning and turnaround agenda required careful attention, but accreditation helped, not hindered, that process.

COA: What are the top three tips that you would give to an organization considering or currently undertaking the accreditation process for the first time?

DM: I would advise organizations to:

1.       Embrace accreditation as the way you do business, not as an extra initiative to take on.

2.       Embrace strategic planning. Find the right strategic planning process for you, and closely link accreditation with your strategic plan. 

3.       Communicate and engage your board of directors with COA.   Many parallels may exist in their industries (e.g., Six Sigma, ISO 9001, Joint Commission, etc.).

Thank you, Lad Lake!

We would like to thank Dan for his thoughtful insights into the accreditation process and acknowledge the entire board and team for embracing accreditation and collectively contributing to the continued success of Lad Lake.

Do you have an accreditation story to tell?
Click here to tell us about it.
You could be the next organization we feature!

It is no secret that the Council on Accreditation (COA) believes in what we do. We promote best practices and help our organizations to implement them with the aim that clients across the social services field will get the best possible quality of care. By accrediting the entire organization, we ensure that everyone—from human resources to finances to support staff—is working together to carry out that mission.

90% of surveyed organizations agree that COA accreditation has improved their quality of services. 86% agree that COA accreditation has improved outcomes for the people they serve.

This is the “why” of organizational accreditation for COA and our accreditees alike. We are all here to do good; following best practices helps us do good in the most effective way possible.

Improving service quality is the most important benefit of organizational accreditation. But from our experience, it is not the only benefit! Every time an organization completes the accreditation process, COA asks about its impact. Several themes have come out of our survey responses.  

Organizational accreditation improves operations.

Whole-organization accreditation provides a framework for staff to look at how they fulfill their mission now and discover how they can do so better. The benefits along the way are multifold: more open communication, sound strategic plans, streamlined work systems, better risk management…the list goes on. When an organization looks at itself holistically, it can find the root of any problems and be better equipped to solve them.

"We have really enjoyed the fact that we are united by the power [of] COA accreditation and by sharing our common mission [of] providing children and families, in a contexual and in a multicultural approach, with the best." -Jorge Alberto Acosta, Founder of Nuevo Amanecer Latino Children's Services

94% of COA-accredited organizations agree that accreditation improves organizational learning and knowledge. 82% agree that it improves organizational capacity. COA accreditation has helped some organizations bring themselves back from the brink of bankruptcy; others have used it as a tool to position themselves to become leaders in the field.

Many have expressed that reaccreditation is not an end of itself, but a tool to help them achieve new heights of living their mission. COA is proud to help them do that.

Organizational accreditation boosts marketability.

Organizational accreditation is a professional, 3rd-party recognition that an organization meets the highest standard for both quality service delivery and administrative practices. The effort that an organization goes through to achieve accreditation proves just how much its staff cares about what they do.

This hard work helps organizations stand out among competitors and builds goodwill. 85% of our organizations agree that COA accreditation improves their organization’s marketability. 90% agree that it improves their relationship with external stakeholders. Clients and community alike are looking for signs of quality—accreditation gives them a big one.

Organizational accreditation helps secure funding.

"By maintaining our accreditation over the past 16 years, my organization has been able to be a leader in the field, and successful in securing government and private foundation grants to further our mission." -Sister Linda Yankoski, President/CEO of the Holy Family Institute

Organizational accreditation verifies that an organization not only does quality work, but also has sound financial, administrative, operational, and oversight practices. This third-party verification can inspire the confidence funders need to support an organization as it continues to grow.

This can help in terms of government funding, as well. COA is recognized in over 300 instances in 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Canada, and China. Our list of recognitions continues to grow, and with it the financial benefit to our accredited organizations. As of December 2018, 70% of our organizations agree that COA accreditation ensures funding.

Organizational accreditation can give staff a sense of fulfillment.

Accreditation encourages organizations to look at themselves frankly and work toward continuous quality improvement. This can allow staff to take a break from their daily grind and appreciate the big picture of their impact. Organizational accreditation also facilitates transparency and open communication, which can increase trust and the feeling that everyone is working as part of one team.  Finally, the quest for quality improvement provides staff with new professional opportunities, allowing them to lead the charge toward a brighter future for those they serve. 

Almost three quarters of COA-accredited organizations agree that accreditation improves workforce engagement, and over half agree that it improves staff retention. Many of our organizations describe how empowering it is to see the change in mindset that accreditation can bring.

Organizational accreditation holds the team to its goals.

"Partnering with COA supports our agency's continuous improvement efforts, aligns our work with best practices, and helps cultivate a well-developed, competent workforce dedicated to rending top-notch service delivery to our community." -Pravin Patel, Human Services Manager II at the San Mateo County Human Services Agency

As anyone with a broken New Year’s resolution knows, it is easy to put great plans in place and never carry them out. Accreditation (and reaccreditation!) forces organizations to follow through with those great plans, holding them accountable to be the best they can be.

94% of COA-accredited organizations agree that our whole-organization accreditation improves transparency and accountability. Through it, staff become not only accountable to their clients and stakeholders, but to themselves.

Time and time again, accreditation has proved transformative for our organizations, supporting their mission and allowing them to provide clients with the quality service they deserve. COA is grateful and humbled to be a part of this important process.

Have you experienced other accreditation benefits not listed here? Share them with us in the comments!

SOURCE: All statistics are pulled from 2018 survey data from organizations accredited by the Council on Accreditation (COA). 

Active military and Veterans play an integral role in our everyday lives. Although we can’t always witness them in action or grasp the full breadth of their influence, we have confidence in their bravery and the safety they provide to our society on a daily basis. While we have this understanding, we also recognize that Veterans in this country often need support when they return home. Not only because of the inherent trauma of combat, but also because of the challenging economic situations that they often find themselves and their families in. We must continue to strive to do better by our Veterans. An example of progress in this area is the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program. This program addresses the varying needs of an individual Veteran and their family, by providing assistance with housing, transportation, child care, and the financial barriers that they may face.

SSVF was established in 2011 as a Rapid Rehousing and Homeless Prevention program to support homeless Veterans and their families in finding permanent housing and prevent homelessness for those at imminent risk due to the housing crisis at the time. In 2019, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is making $326 million in grants available to providers through a competitive application process, in order to assist them with providing SSVF services. These services assist Veteran families with outreach, case management, and assistance accessing and coordinating other services that promote housing stability and community integration. The program has had several successes since its inception.

In 2015, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe announced that Virginia would be the first state in the nation to functionally eliminate Veteran homelessness. The philosophy underlying the state’s initiative is housing first — a policy that holds that providing homeless people with safe, supportive housing is a precondition for attending to the issues that caused them to slip through the cracks in the first place. Supportive services in permanent housing typically keep residents linked to social workers and include health services — many single homeless adults have some kind of serious physical, mental or substance abuse-related problem — and job readiness programs .

Virginia is not the only state that has seen successes with this population. SSVF, Phoenix, Arizona was the first community in the country to end homelessness among veterans with lengthy histories of homelessness. The tenet of the program as described by one veteran, “I’m coming up on nine months sober, and a big part of it is because I have a roof over my head.” The program allows participants to prioritize their recovery because they are no longer consumed with the fundamental human need of finding shelter.

Many capacities/elements are considered when applying to be a SSVF provider, one of which is a provider’s accreditation status. The Council on Accreditation is recognized by the VA as an approved accreditor of SSVF services. SSVF providers that are COA accredited are eligible to receive a three-year funding award from the VA, while non-accredited providers are limited to one-year funding awards. Recognition of specific accreditors is often used as a tool for oversight entities, in this case the VA, uses accreditation to meet/or exceed oversight requirements. The VA also allows SSVF providers to use their funding to pay for accreditation. This incentivizes providers to become accredited and allows the VA to verify that these providers have gone through a rigorous third party review by an accreditor. Essentially the VA uses accreditation as a tool to indicate a quality provider with quality services, services that are best equipped to support U.S Veterans and their families.

Jill Albanese, Supervisory Regional Coordinator at the VA, oversees providers of the SSVF program and has been with the department since the creation of the program. Jill graciously took time to explain how the VA’s recognition of COA accreditation played a role in them determining funding for these grantees. Check out our discussion below.

COA: What was the genesis of recognizing an accreditor for this funding?

JA: When SSVF was being created we wanted to find a way to monitor and oversee the program consistently within our limited resources. We looked into how other non-profit oversight entities were doing this work and began learning more about the accreditation process.

COA: Why is accreditation status a component of the SSVF grant?

JA: We wanted agencies to become accredited, however we did not want to mandate it and limit services in a community if a provider does not yet have an accreditation status. To further incentivize accreditation we allow providers to use SSVF funds to pay for accreditation and allow accredited organizations to be eligible for three-year funding awards.

COA: Were those incentives effective?

JA: Yes, I would estimate that about half of all SSVF providers are accredited.

COA: How has recognizing COA accreditation impacted the VA’s oversight of the SSVF program?

JA: We’ve seen increased consistency amongst accredited SSVF providers. In addition, we have consistent oversight practices for accredited organizations that allows us to reduce the duplicative work that we do to monitor the programs. We use an Accreditation Tool that shows our auditors which review steps would have been covered for them to achieve accreditation. We can spend less time monitoring those sections already reviewed under the accreditation process and more time focusing on offering technical assistance to our providers. It saves time for auditors and providers.

COA: Can you tell us about the roll out of the accreditation provision?

JA: Initially, we gave priority funding to applicants that were already accredited at the time. Then we worked with each accreditor recognized to determine specific service sections that we felt most appropriately fit the SSVF program. The accreditors then crosswalked their standards with our regulations and we were able to achieve further consistency between provider agencies.

COA: What have you heard from providers related to the accreditation process?

JA: I recently spoke with a provider about this, they described the process as totally worth it. In fact, this particular provider is excited to now be mentoring another agency through the accreditation process. I’ve also heard positive comments on the standards themselves. The process is rigorous, particularly before the Site Visit, but overall providers seem to appreciate the organizational change it creates.

COA: How do you think the accreditation process has impacted SSVF providers?

JA: Anecdotally, there seems to be an increased sense of organization about them. Particularly in day-to-day work we’ve seen providers transform their processes and procedures, which has an improved impact on the services delivered. It has increased the expectation of quality amongst SSVF providers, which has led to increased quality amongst the providers applying for SSVF funds.

COA: As the oversight entity, have there been any challenges to having an accreditation component for the grant?

JA: SSVF is a dynamic program that is constantly changing. Our mission is always the same, but the method changes, in some instances these changes can be rapid. It helps that the accreditors are ready and willing to make changes when that happens.

COA: Are there any components of accreditation that you find particularly valuable as an oversight entity?

JA: The individual governance standards, and policies and procedures are extremely helpful. It provides agencies guidance and structure. If a provider loses a staff member having these components of accreditation in place help them stabilize, which is good for Veterans.

COA: What impact do you feel the accreditation process has on the individuals served by SSVF programs?

JA: Ultimately, the individual Veteran has been able to expect a greater emphasis on consistent services. Anecdotally, the providers seem to run smoother operations.

COA: Has the role of an accreditor created any efficiencies for the VA as an oversight entity?

JA: Program review has become more efficient. Grantees are more organized for the process, which allows us to save time on things that usually require a lot of back and forth. It saves a lot of time day-to-day.

COA: Is there anything else you want to share that we haven’t covered in these questions?

JA: It’s amazing to see the differences from one year to the next with these providers. They’re eager to share their progress and the successes their clients have achieved.

Thank you!

We would like to take a moment to thank Jill for her time and insights, but mostly for the work she does every day to support Veterans in this country. COA looks forward to our continued collaborative partnership with the VA.  

Accreditation is a journey. One with a clear destination, but a less defined path. There are mile markers along the way; however, there isn’t necessarily one straight, easy road to the finish line. Is there a recommended route? Are there any anticipated hurdles? If you are tasked with leading the accreditation process for your organization, you may not know where to start. This is where COA’s Accreditation Coordinators come in.

"Being an Accreditation Coordinator is such a unique role. Our indirect impact on the field through our work with organizations drives me, while the endless opportunities for learning keeps me energized, excited, and inspired." -COA Accreditation Coordinator

Every organization seeking COA accreditation is assigned an Accreditation Coordinator, a COA staff member that serves as a single point-of-contact throughout the accreditation journey. The role of the Accreditation Coordinator is unique to COA’s facilitative accreditation process. They work closely with the organization’s designated single point-of-contact, which COA refers to as the Primary Contact. Through this partnership, an organization obtains the support they need to navigate the road ahead. 

Roles and responsibilities

Accreditation Coordinator

An Accreditation Coordinator works concurrently with a number of organizations. Their caseload can vary as well as the needs of each organization. The coordinators can also specialize in distinct accreditation programs or service types (Financial Education and Counseling, Employee Assistance Programs, Opioid Treatment Providers, etc.). Communication is a key element to this role. They’re responsible for answering questions, providing feedback on submitted documentation, and referring organizations to training and resources. Whether it’s to discuss specific documentation, standards, practices, or policies, they’re available on a daily basis to address inquiries from organizations. And because each organization comes with unique questions and circumstances, researching program models and administrative practices is also part of the work.

"I love being able to support Primary Contacts throughout the entirety of an inherently challenging and complex process. Working with Primary Contacts who are so committed to quality and best practices is a reminder that what goes on behind the scenes is just as important as the work that takes place on the ground." -COA Accreditation Coordinator

While the day-to-day routine of an Accreditation Coordinator involves providing tailored support to organizations, it is also valuable to note the role’s limitations. Accreditation Coordinators are not consultants and do not provide consultation to organizations. They can help Primary Contacts interpret the standards and answer questions, but are unable to dictate how implementation will look on the ground. Organizations are responsible for the application of the standards. And while they review and provide feedback on select pieces of evidence, specifically six key documents referred to as the Preliminary Self-Study (PSS), it is not within their role to review the entire Self-Study (aka all of the evidence that is required based on the assigned standards). The Site Review Team assesses the Self-Study prior to the Site Visit and will provide the ratings after conducting the on-site review.

Primary Contact 

The Primary Contact is COA’s champion at the organization level and is in charge of spearheading the accreditation process. In this role, they’re responsible for engaging organization staff in all things COA. While the Primary Contact is the single point-of-contact, accreditation is by no means a one-person job. Accreditation is a huge team effort, from pulling together Self-Study evidence to preparing for the Site Visit, and the Primary Contact is the team captain. It’s no coincidence that we have repeatedly heard the role compared to “herding cats”!

Accreditation Coordinator and Primary Contact Roles and Responsibilities

Exploring the relationship between the Accreditation Coordinator and the Primary Contact 

COA’s mission is to partner with human service organizations worldwide to improve service delivery outcomes by developing, applying, and promoting accreditation standards. The relationship between the Accreditation Coordinator and the Primary Contact brings that partnership to life. The two work together throughout the accreditation process, from start (the intake call) to finish (the notification of accreditation). They’re there to kick off the expedition, advise you of the twists and turns, help navigate roadblocks, and ultimately make sure your organization hits all the necessary milestones en route to the final destination. Along the way, Primary Contacts should provide the Accreditation Coordinator with updates on their progress, highlighting successes and challenges. That information helps COA gauge the organization’s strengths and needs and informs the provision of targeted supports.

Learning about the challenges of navigating the process is vital to COA. We want to know about the unexpected obstacles in order to assist with readjusting your approach and preventing you from spiraling off course. For example, Performance and Quality Improvement (PQI) can be one major hurdle for organizations. As the Primary Contact it can feel daunting to try to implement a culture of PQI, especially if your organization doesn’t have the framework in place. As an Accreditation Coordinator, some of my favorite moments working with Primary Contacts have come from discussing the evolution of PQI. It could be talking through the development of a PQI committee (“Who should be on it?” “How often should they meet?”) or figuring out performance and outcome measures (“Can you explain outputs and outcomes again?” “What are some examples of operations and management performance measures?”). Standards and technical assistance inevitability guide the conversation, but it’s through this exchange that we learn how an organization goes about creating change. And isn’t that what it’s really all about? PQI helps an organization become stronger to better serve their clients and community.

"Primary Contacts are my connection to the field! Hearing stories about their organization's fantastic work--as well as talking through the more complex points of the different programs and services they offer--is always something that keeps me grounded and reminds me of why we do what we do." -COA Accreditation Coordinator

The relationship between the Accreditation Coordinator and Primary Contact is not one-size-fits-all. We are there to support in whatever capacity is most beneficial for the organization. For some this may take the form of structured monthly check-in calls, while others prefer Q&A exchanges over email. We recommend that organizations new to the accreditation process or new to the role of Primary Contact have more regular communication with their Accreditation Coordinator. Seasoned individuals may not need to rely on their coordinator as much; they remember the journey and have their path mapped out. Regardless of the frequency of contact, the door for communication is always open.

Tips for Primary Contacts

We know that serving as the Primary Contact is not an easy task. Often the work of accreditation is piled onto an already full plate. Here are some tips and tricks from COA’s team of Accreditation Coordinators: 

Training and resources

Want to know how to create a policy? We have a tip sheet for that! Want to know how to develop a strategic plan? We have a template (along with a self-paced training and blog post) for that! We’ve included just a few of the many resources that can help organizations on the road to achieving COA accreditation. We recommend exploring the full breadth of resources by accessing the tool search in the MyCOA Portal.

You are not alone

Many of us at COA have a social work (or social work adjacent) background, and the work we do to support Primary Contacts in their efforts to create change in their organizations, mirrors the work organizations do with their clients. We conduct an assessment. We create a service plan. We deliver supports and linkages to necessary resources. The makeup of our caseloads may be different, but we are all working towards a common goal – positive client outcomes and high quality services.

And as you learn from us, we learn from you. You are the change makers, advocating for those that you serve and making an impact on your communities. For many of us, the stories that you share and the work that you do are why we walk through the doors at COA. You are our direct connection to the field. Our collaboration allows us to gain a better understanding of service delivery and program models, as well as how the implementation of best practice looks on the ground for organizations of all shapes and sizes.

At the end of the day, an organization is ultimately responsible for their accreditation process, however, you are not alone on the journey. COA’s Accreditation Coordinators are there to support you and your team.

When the Family First Prevention Services Act (H.R.253) was passed, it recognized that the best placement for children is in the least restrictive setting. This is also true for undocumented children in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

In that regard, since 1997, the Flores Settlement Agreement has defined the rights of these children. In essence, it obligates the government to keep the children in the least restrictive setting and sets standards for their care.  Recently, however, the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Health and Human Services (HHS) have put forth a proposal to withdraw the agreement.

The agreement was never meant to be a de facto law so much as a framework, and in the original agreement there was a sunset clause expiring the agreement after 5 years provided the government implemented the terms of the settlement as federal regulation or Congress superseded it. Neither has happened. In fact, in 2015 the settlement was expanded to include all minors who come across the border without legal authorization (not just the unaccompanied ones who become custody of the federal government).

Despite the absence of the required federal regulation or congressional action, DHS and HHS have begun the process to withdraw the agreement. In doing so, families could be detained and placed in less regulated facilities, broadening the allowances for emergency loopholes for not meeting standards of care, and making it easier for government to revoke legal protections for unaccompanied minors.

This proposed rule change includes a comment period that ends November 6th, 2018 after which Judge Dolly Gee will determine whether the regulations are eligible to supersede the Flores Settlement Agreement. COA is urging interested parties to provide comments which put forth recommendations that emphasize the well-being of a child, and which ensure that migrant children receive trauma-informed and evidence-based care in the least restrictive setting.

The best practice of care for these children was established by the Flores Settlement Agreement and is contained in COA’s UC standards. It includes wraparound services to support their integration into society and placing them with kin or resource families in the most home-like settings. It has been two decades since the Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) Study was conducted and the lessons learned have been indelible to the field: childhood trauma has long lasting effects. We cannot discuss the needs of this population without discussing the need for trauma-informed care.

So what can we do as human service professionals? Well, there are a few options: