An overview of the Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute's RAF method for quality assurance in the social services in Israel.

1. 1
Quality Improvement and
Performance Measurement
in Social Services in Israel

2. 2
Main Goals of the RAF Method
1. Monitor adherence to the standards and regulations
2. Encourage continuous improvement at all levels
3. Enhance management capacities of the care facilities
4. Provide database for policy making

3. Residential settings for:
• The aged
• Children at risk
• Juvenile offenders
• People with physical disabilities
• People with developmental disabilities
• People struggling with alcohol, drug, and gambling
addictions
3
Services Utilizing the RAF Method
Services in the community:
• All community services for children and youth at risk
• Rehabilitative preschool facilities for children with
disabilities
• Service for treatment of addictions
• Social Service departments at the municipalities

4. 4
Prior to RAF:
• The regulatory process: not systematic and not uniform
• Inspectors serving mainly as advisors
• Hardly any written documentation in the:
 Facilities
 Inspection system
• No computerization
• No systematic database
• Minimal follow-up of correction of deficiencies

5. 5
1. Collecting client data
2. Analyzing client data
and producing reports
3. Constructing personal
care plans
Regular
inspector
visits
Regular
inspector
visits
Regular
inspector
visits
4. Collecting facility
level data
5. Year of Comprehensive Inspection
Process
Comprehensive
visit
Feedback to the facility
& constructing a yearly
work plan
Initial
follow-up
Regular
inspector
visits
5. Year without Comprehensive
Inspection Process
Constructing a yearly work plan
6. Internal quality
assurance processes
7. Decisions about
licensing the facility
Regular
inspector
visits
Regular
inspector
visits
Index:
Multi-Annual Inspection, according to the Raf Method
Inspection processes
Inspection processes

6. 6
Types of Data Provided by the RAF System
1. Data on clients
• Demographic and administrative data
• Profile of their problems (tracers)
2. Data on quality of care in the facilities:
• Treatment
• Management
• Infrastructure
• Client's perspective
3. Information on implementing inspection
• Meeting work plan requirements

7. 7
The Impact of the RAF: The Inspection Level
1. Creating uniform and systematic tools for inspection
2. Streamlining the process of regulation
3. Transparency and improved dialogue with the care
facility
4. Incorporating the client viewpoint as part of the
regulation process
5. Decisions based on data
6. Help in dealing with irregular incidents

8. 8
The Impact of the RAF: The Level of the Care Facility
1. An enhanced sense of fairness
2. Improved service
3. Improved record keeping
4. More structured work procedures
5. Triggering organizational learning processes and
data-based decision making

9. 9
The Impact of the RAF: The Service Management Level
1. Data-based policymaking
2. Upgrading standards and regulations
3. Creating a common language and basis for
comparison
4. A solid base for steps of enforcement
5. Improving the ability to monitor the regulation
process

10. 10
Contributing Factors for Successful Implementation
1. Awareness and motivation to change
2. Commitment of the leadership
3. True partnership between people in the field and the
advisory body
4. Gradual implementation
5. Providing resources and infrastructure
6. Using opinion leaders to serve as agents of change
7. Flexibility
8. Presenting data in a user friendly way
9. Immediate response to obstacles

11. 11
The Ministry of Social Affairs
The RAF System
The Children and Youth Services
1413121110987654321AgeGenderFirst
Name
Family
Name
I.D.
10M
10M
9M
10F
9F
7M
10M
11M
13M
10F
11F
10F
13. Suicidal
behavior
11. Drug abuse9. Enuresis7. Problematic
social behavior
5. Problematic
relations with family
3. Running
away
1. Low achievement
at school
List of
Tracers
14. Problematic
sexual behavior
12. Depression
and anxiety
10. Alcohol use8. Theft6. Aggression4. Physical
self-neglect
2. Behavior at
school
No problem
Having no difficulty with tracer
Difficulty with tracer – no change from the previous year
Difficulty with tracer in previous year – improvement noted this year


 







 




















Sample Report

