HOW ARE RATINGS DETERMINED?

Rating System Overview

The Site Visit Team uses the following rating scale to assess implementation of the standards and program performance:

1 = Full Implementation/Outstanding Performance
2 = Substantial Implementation/Strong Performance
3 = Partial Implementation/Concerning Performance
4 = Unsatisfactory Implementation and Performance

When a rating indicator does not describe an program's exact situation, the Team will assign the rating that most closely captures the program's response to the standard's intent.

Assignment of Ratings

The Site Visit Team uses professional judgment and information provided by the program in its Self-Study and during the site visit to rate an program's implementation of the standards. The Site Visit Team's ratings on all applicable standards are based on:

• Self-Study documentation;
• program and facility observations;
• questionnaire data and information;
• materials provided on site; and
• interviews with staff, clients, and other key stakeholders.

Achieving Recognition

A program must ultimately receive the following ratings in order to achieve recognition:

• "1" or "2" on all Purpose Standards
• "1" or "2" on all Core Concept Standards
• While an program can achieve recognition with a "3" or "4" rating on some Practice Standards, these ratings cannot reflect a pattern of partial or unsatisfactory implementation
• "1" or "2" on all Fundamental Practice Standards