 |
| TREATING
TEENS |
 |
National
Accreditation
By Drug Strategies All
exemplary adolescent drug treatment programs included in Treating
Teens: A Guide to Adolescent Drug Programs have been licensed by
their respective states to provide addiction services. However,
requirements for such licensure vary from state to state, making
it difficult to compare programs nationwide. At the same time, half
of the 144 teen treatment programs described in Treating Teens have
also been accredited by one or more of the three leading organizations
that have established national standards for drug treatment programs:
the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations
(JCAHO), the Rehabilitation Accreditation Commission (CARF), and
the Council on Accreditation (COA).
The Joint Commission, founded in 1951, is a nonprofit organization
dedicated to improving safety and quality of care in organized health
care settings such as hospitals, ambulatory care organizations,
assisted living communities, and laboratories. Each year, the Joint
Commission accredits more than 16,000 health care organizations,
including over 1,600 organizations engaged in behavioral health
care, developmental disabilities, foster care or addiction services.
Its members are the American College of Physicians, the American
College of Surgeons, the American Dental Association, the American
Hospital Association and the American Medical Association. The Joint
Commission develops accreditation standards, awards accreditation
decisions, and provides ongoing education and consultation to health
care organizations. The Joint Commission's standards provide an
objective evaluation process to help in measuring, assessing and
improving performance. The standards are divided into individual-focused
functions (for example, assessment, care, education, rights, responsibilities
and ethics) and organizational functions (leadership, management
of the environment of care, human resources and information systems,
etc.).
Founded in 1966,
CARF, a nonprofit organization, has the support of over 25 national
organizations which approve the goals of its accreditation process.
These include the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,
the American Psychiatric Association, Goodwill Industries International
and the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors.
Over the past 35 years, the CARF standards have evolved through
the active participation of providers, consumers and purchasers
of services and are viewed as "national consensus standards"
rather than ones derived solely from research.
The CARF standards
cover seven areas: organizational leadership and responsibility;
organizational management; quality improvement; general program
standards; behavioral health core program and specific populations
(such as criminal justice or children and adolescents); employment
and community core services; and network administration when two
or more organizations establish formal agreements to deliver rehabilitation
services. Each area is divided into subsections, each with its own
standards. For example, organizational management is divided into
five categories: information management; fiscal management; human
resources; communication; and accessibility, health, safety and
transportation.
Founded in 1977 by the Child Welfare League of America and Family
Service America, the Council on Accreditation (COA) is an international,
nonprofit accrediting organization for children, youth, and family
services. COA sets standards covering organizational, management,
and service practices. The organizational and management standards
(governance, fiscal management, human resources management, quality
improvement) are applicable for all agencies, regardless of type
of services provided. In recognizing the unique aspects of service
delivery systems, separate standards were created for public and
private (nonprofit and for profit) agencies. The service standards
cover specific protocols for 38 types of social and behavioral healthcare
programs including substance abuse, opiod treatment, residential
and day treatment. Development of the standards is conducted on
a consensus basis by soliciting input from service providers, funders,
policymakers and consumers based in the United States and Canada.
Similarly, COA uses a peer review process to accredit organizations;
CEOs, senior administrative staff, clinical staff, and recently
retired staff from established COA accredited organizations, as
well as faculty from schools of social work, comprise the over 900
volunteer peer network who conduct on-site visits to evaluate an
organization's performance. In 2001, COA accredited or was in the
process of accrediting more than 1,400 private and public organizations.
Accreditation
from all three organizations is based on compliance with standards
listed in their manuals. All list primarily the same standards but
have grouped these standards into different categories. Organizations
must have implemented these standards for several months prior to
the accreditation survey, which will be verified by verbal and written
information, on-site observations, documents provided by the organization
to the accrediting body, and interviews with consumers and staff.
This process is designed to help organizations identify and correct
problems and improve the quality of care and services provided.
In addition, the on-site survey provides an opportunity for consultation
and education.
Accreditation
from these three organizations can influence consumer decisions,
facilitate third party payments, reduce exposure to legal action,
increase community confidence and enhance an organization's prestige.
Accreditation is increasingly used as a prerequisite to establish
eligibility for insurance reimbursement from managed care plans.
The process
of obtaining accreditation, however, requires significant expenditure
of time (on average one year) and financial resources (separate
fees may be charged for accreditation, peer review team site visit
and maintenance of accreditation)-assets often scarce in many organizations,
particularly small ones. Despite growing interest in providing accountability,
many quality programs may not wish to go through the comprehensive
accreditation process since their state licenses provide eligibility
to receive state funds. Some programs believe they are very effective
even without obtaining national accreditation. In any case, the
demand for teen drug treatment programs far exceeds the supply thus
reducing the financial need for national accreditation. |
|