QUALITY STANDARDS IN CAREER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES A Canadian Snapshot and an International Perspective CDSWG Report: 2010

2 Outline Background and Importance of the project What is meant by Quality Standards? Involvement and Process The Results: General Observations, Canadian Innovations & Canadian Challenges Next steps: Possible Future Directions Impact on Career Development

3 Background and Importance Goal of CDSWG: Enhance the quality and effectiveness of CDS. Funded a study to gather a “snapshot” of the state of practice of Quality Service Standards in Canada and internationally. Quality Standards = Quality Services The results would provide needed information on Quality Standards, highlight promising practices, and suggest recommendations to move the Quality Standards agenda forward in Canada.

4 What is meant by Quality Standards A Quality Standard is a statement of the expected level of performance to be achieved. Quality Standards in career and employment services may cover:  The standards set for services and some way of monitoring whether these standards are being met  The qualifications/competencies of delivery staff  The outcomes of services and a system for tracking and reporting on outcomes Umbrella term: Quality Assurance (QA)

5 Involvement and Process CANADA: A cross section of career & employment services (provincial/municipal government, government- funded, community based) Key informant interviews  7 provincial coordinators/3 rd party coordinators  4 third party providers  2 community-based providers  2 community-based umbrella organizations

6 Involvement and Process con’t Sample of questions for Service Standards Is a service charter or vision in place for the organization? Are access and /or wait times for services specified? Are clients informed about what services are available to them? Is a requirement in place that all clients have an action plan and identified steps to take in order to achieve their goal? Is a system for dealing with client complaints in place? Are times specified during which follow-up should occur?

7 Involvement and Process con’t INTERNATIONAL: An overview of Quality Assurance systems EU Quality Standards Working Group

8 The Results: General Observations The Canadian key drivers pushing the QA agenda forward in Canada appear to be very similar to those cited internationally:  General trend toward introduction of QA systems across all public services  Shift in philosophy underpinning service provision (user satisfaction becoming key element in design of services)  Career development field becoming more professionalized, with stronger identity

9 The Results: General Observations Con’t Canada seems to take a hybrid approach to QA (Administrative-centred, User-centred and Practitioner- led) Common Threads:  Recognize importance of impact assessment, but current reporting limited to narrow quantitative measures  Need for collaborative development of QA systems EU Common Reference Tools can provide very useful framework

10 The Results: Canadian Innovations A priority on staff development and their work and workplace satisfaction as a necessary precursor to quality service and achievement of outcomes A clear movement towards developing more meaningful outcome indicators  Tracking progress  Employment equivalencies  Assessing quality of work  Degree of match between supply and demand

11 The Results: Canadian Innovations Con’t A weighted client input model which recognizes that achievement of successful outcome is more difficult with some clients than others Certification of offices delivering employment services A shift from program centered to client centered services

12 The Results: Canadian Challenges Evidence/Outcome indicators are currently incomplete and inadequate – contract compliance and QA need to be differentiated qualitatively and quantitatively Data gathering tools and systems and limited There is almost no focus on the quality of the processes of services (What does “good” service consist of?)

13 The Results: Canadian Challenges Con’t There is secrecy about QA standards The use of the Canadian S & Gs as a tool for consistency of service is growing, but still needs to expand There is still an imbalance in emphasis in the importance accorded to the 3 dimensions of QA – service, practitioner and outcomes.

14 Next Steps: Suggested Directions Create a mechanism whereby promising Canadian QA approaches, tools and results can be shared – possible partners include CRWG, CCCDA, ICCDPP Commission a study to give the Canadian public a voice in assessing and influencing career & employment services

15 Next Steps: Suggested Directions Con’t Make building the evidence base for career & employment services a high priority through supporting research, on-line data gathering tools for common indicators Promote models, approaches and research which demonstrate a holistic, balanced approach to QA (Balancing Service Delivery, Practitioner and Outcomes Standards)

16 Impact on Career Development Movement in the last years towards “proving” that CDS work. Effective QA processes are an essential part of the equation to providing that proof. QA approaches produce evidence, which in turn may be used as the basis for policy decisions (decisions made on gathered information and structured feedback)

17 Contact Information Heather Collier Director Ph Fax Carol Forster Senior Policy Analyst Ph Fax For full report and additional questions: Forum of Labour Market Ministers