DOS: Request for Statements of Interest for Accrediting Entities

By Rally on 10-30-2020 in Accreditation Agencies, USDOS

From here:
“Request for Statements of Interest for Accrediting Entities

For Parties Interested in Seeking Department Designation as Accrediting Entities, to Accredit and Approve Adoption Service Providers in Intercountry Adoption

I. SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF INTEREST (RSI)

A. Announcement

The Department of State (the Department) announces through this Request for Statements of Interest (RSI) an opportunity to become a designated accrediting entity (AE) to perform accreditation/approval, monitoring and oversight, and/or related duties for adoption service providers in intercountry adoption. This opportunity is extended to: 1) nonprofit organizations with expertise in developing and administering standards for entities providing child welfare services, and 2) U.S. State or local government public authorities with such expertise and responsibility for licensing adoption agencies.

B. Deadline and Process for Filing of Statements of Interest

Responses to this RSI are due by 5:00 p.m. EST on February 1, 2021, in electronic form only.

Completed Statements of Interest should be sent by email to Adoption@state.gov. Please include “Statement of Interest – Accrediting Entity Designation” in the subject line. Due to security restrictions, external media devices cannot be accepted. PDF documents are preferred for text-intensive documents. Excel spreadsheets are preferred for data-intensive documents. For questions about the content of this RSI, contact Adoption@state.gov.

C. Authorities Related to Selection of Accrediting Entities

Selection of AEs is carried out in conformance with the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Convention), the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 (IAA), the Universal Accreditation Act of 2012 (UAA), and applicable regulations in 22 CFR Part 96. Each designated AE will enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Department to perform duties as required by the IAA in cases subject to the Convention, and as required by the UAA in non-Convention orphan cases defined in section 101(b)(1)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Department may designate more than one AE, may set geographic or other jurisdictional limitations for each AE, and may authorize an AE to perform some or all of the duties listed in 22 C.F.R. § 96.7(a).

D. Eligibility Requirements

Under the IAA and 22 CFR 96.5, to qualify to be designated as an AE, an entity must be either:

an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended; or,
a public entity (other than a Federal entity), including, but not limited to, any State or local government or governmental unit or any political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, that is responsible for licensing adoption agencies in a State;

and

that has expertise in developing and administering standards for providing child welfare services.

Hereinafter, entities meeting the criteria above are referred to collectively as “applicants” seeking designation as AE.

E. Additional Requirements

If designated as an AE, a State or local government public entity may only accredit or approve agencies or persons located in the State in which it is located.

The Department will only select for designation as an AE an applicant that meets the performance criteria set forth in 22 CFR 96.6.

Designated AEs must demonstrate capability to align technological resources with other designated AEs and to capture data required by the IAA and upon the Department’s request.

Designated AEs will be expected to use paid and/or contracted staff, rather than volunteers, to execute the duties of the AE.

Designated AEs must be able to charge and receive fees for AE services.

F. Process for Designating Accrediting Entities

Steps in the AE selection process include:

1) The Department will undertake an initial review of the Statements of Interest received by the submission deadline, and will evaluate which applicants, if any, meet eligibility requirements. Applications that do not meet eligibility criteria stated in this RSI will not be reviewed further.

2) The Department will evaluate the merits of each eligible application package in accordance with 22 CFR 96.6 and other regulatory requirements of an AE. The Department may, at its discretion, conduct on-site visits of applicant organizations or request follow up information.

3) The Department will make a final determination of which applicants, if any, will be designated and will inform the selected parties of its decision.

4) The Department and the selected applicants, if any, sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), which formally designate selected applicants to be AEs.

5) The signed MOAs, if any, are published in the Federal Register.

The initial MOA for accreditation and approval services will be for a period not to exceed five years.

G. The Department is Under No Obligation to Designate Particular Organizations as AEs

The Department is under no obligation to designate any particular applicant as an AE or to enter into a MOA with any respondent to this RSI. A selected applicant is not authorized to act as a designated AE or represent to others that it is a designated AE until the Department and the AE have signed an MOA.

II. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE ROLE AND AUTHORITY OF ACCREDITING ENTITIES

A. Introduction and Statutory Framework

The IAA designates the Department of State as the Central Authority for the United States. The IAA confers on the Department the authority and responsibility for establishing and overseeing the system for accreditation/approval and monitoring and oversight of accredited agencies and approved persons (hereinafter referred to as adoption service providers (ASP) to provide adoption services in intercountry adoption cases. Rather than mandating the Department to directly accredit/approve ASPs, the IAA directs the Department to select and designate one or more AEs to carry out those functions. Under the IAA, agencies and persons that provide certain adoption services in Convention cases (cases pursuant to INA section 101(b)(1)(G)) must be accredited or approved. The UAA went into effect in the United States on July 14, 2014, and extended the requirement for accreditation or approval of ASPs to orphan cases (cases pursuant to INA section 101(b)(1)(F)) in non-Convention countries.

AE applicants should be familiar with the following statutes and regulations laying out the Department’s and AEs’ legal authority and regulatory requirements:

The 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Senate Treaty Doc. 105-51, 105th Cong., 2d Sess.);

The Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-279; 114 Stat. 825; 42 U.S.C. 14901 et seq.);

The Intercountry Adoption Universal Accreditation Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-276); and

The accreditation regulations published at 22 CFR Part 96.

The authorities and responsibilities of designated AEs are discussed at 22 CFR 96.7.

Applicants may wish to review the July 28, 2017 Memorandum of Agreement between the Department and the Intercountry Adoption Accreditation and Maintenance Entity, Inc. (IAAME,) which is currently the sole designated AE.

B. Duties Performed by Designated Accrediting Entities

The IAA and UAA require that agencies and persons that wish to provide adoption services (as defined in the accreditation regulations) in intercountry adoption cases must either be accredited, approved, or operating under the supervision and responsibility of a U.S. accredited ASP, unless the agency or person falls under one of the exceptions to these requirements as set forth in the IAA. AEs will, pursuant to their MOAs with the Department, assume responsibility for determining whether agencies and persons are eligible for accreditation/approval in accordance with procedures and standards set forth in the implementing regulations. Any AE must use the Department’s standards in subpart F of the accreditation regulations and may not impose any different or additional accreditation/approval standards.

In addition, as set forth in 22 CFR 96.7, the Department authorizes designated AEs to perform monitoring and oversight of accredited/approved ASPs’ compliance with applicable standards in Subpart F, review of and response to complaints about accredited/ approved ASPs (including their use of supervised providers), the taking of adverse action, determination of eligibility for renewal, and/or data collection and reporting.

The AE may be responsible for any other responsibilities listed in 22 CFR 96.7 and/or other responsibilities set forth in the MOA.

C. Costs and Fees

Accreditation/approval services, as well as ongoing monitoring and oversight, are provided on a fee for service basis without cost to the Department or other parts of the U.S. Government.

AEs may recover their costs through the assessment and collection of fees for accreditation/approval and monitoring/oversight. An AE’s fee schedule shall be subject to the approval of the Department and must meet criteria identified in 22 CFR 96.8. The fees that the AE expects to collect should be sufficient to cover costs associated with the full range of AE responsibilities and shall not exceed the full costs of accreditation/approval and monitoring/oversight, including but not limited to, costs for completing the accreditation/approval process, complaint review, routine oversight and enforcement, training, and other data collection and reporting activities.

III. PREPARATION OF THE STATEMENT OF INTEREST

Applicants should respond to the following prompts as fully as possible to provide information about how they will carry out the AE authorities and responsibilities, as discussed in 22 CFR 96.7. Applicants may attach sample materials as exhibits to accompany any Statement of Interest.

Organizational Capacity to Perform Accrediting Entity Functions and Responsibilities

(A) History and Expertise in Operating an Accreditation System

Question 1: Describe your experience and past performance that demonstrates your capacity to assume the tasks described in this RSI. Highlight a brief history of your organization, the development of your accreditation and/or licensing practice, and your experience in developing and administering standards for child welfare services. If applicable, briefly describe the range of other services provided by your organization. Describe your experience with intercountry adoption programs, if any. If you are a newly formed entity, describe the expertise, experience, and strengths of your organizational team, and explain how that would translate into ability to fulfill the AE responsibilities.

Question 2: To demonstrate your experience, provide the following information, if known, for the previous five-year period:

Summary figures on the volume of your accrediting and/or licensing activity;
Percentage and numbers of first-time applicants that were granted accreditation or licensure;
Percentage and numbers of applicants required to remedy deficiencies before accreditation or licensure was granted;
Percentage and number of applicants that applied for accreditation or licensure and were not accredited or licensed; and
Percentage and number of instances where accreditation or licensure was withdrawn or not renewed.

(B) Organizational Structure and Resources

Your organizational structure, human resources practices, financial resources, and systems of control must be adequate to undertake the tasks described in this RSI. Please provide information on the following:

Question 3: Describe your organizational structure and division of responsibilities. Provide a general description of the capacities and strengths of the organization’s personnel to carry out the accreditation/approval and monitoring/oversight functions.

(C) Evaluating Agencies or Persons for Accreditation or Approval (22 CFR 96.7(a)(1-2); 22 CFR 96, Subpart E; and 22 CFR 96, Subparts F and G)

22 CFR, Part 96, Subpart F discusses the standards for ASP accreditation/approval. An AE may not impose any additional standards. Questions in this section pertain to the measures and procedures you propose to use in the evaluation of an applicant seeking accreditation/approval. The Substantial Compliance System is the current scoring and weighting system for evaluating whether an ASP is in substantial compliance with applicable accreditation standards and whether it may or may not be accredited/ approved. An AE must use site visits as part of the process of evaluating an ASP’s substantial compliance.

Question 4: Mandatory procedures for evaluating new applicants for accreditation/approval can be found at 22 CFR, Part 96, Subpart E. Describe your proposed methods for evaluating an applicant seeking renewal of accreditation or approval. Specifically, explain what questions you would ask and what documents you would review for the evaluation, and describe the on-site evaluation procedures that you would use.

Question 5: Describe your experience with assessing and scoring compliance with accreditation criteria or licensing standards and provide relevant documentation of those procedures.

(D) Monitoring Compliance with Applicable Requirements/Evaluating Renewal Requests (22 CFR 96.7(a)(3), 22 CFR 96, Subpart E, and Subparts H -K)

AEs are required to monitor the continued compliance of ASPs with the accreditation and approval standards. The normal period of accreditation/approval is four years, after which the ASP must apply for renewal of its accreditation/approval.

Question 6: In reviewing Subpart F, describe how you perform ongoing monitoring and oversight of ASPs during the accreditation/approval period. How would you determine whether a site visit is warranted as part of the monitoring and oversight process? Under what circumstances, if any, should a site visit be unannounced?

Question 7: Specifically address how you would monitor and oversee compliance with the following standards found in 22 CFR 96 Subpart F:

22 CFR 96.33 – Budget, audit, insurance, and risk assessment requirements
22 CFR 96.34 – Compensation
22 CFR 96.36 – Prohibition on child buying
22 CFR 96.40 – Fee policies and procedures
22 CFR 96.41 – Procedures for responding to complaints and improving delivery service
22 CFR 96.44 – Acting as a primary provider
22 CFR 96.46 – Using providers in foreign countries
22 CFR 96.49 – Provision of medical and social information in incoming cases
22 CFR 96.50 – Placement and post-placement monitoring until final adoption in incoming cases
22 CFR 96.52(e) – This pertains to scenarios in which the Department identifies a required task that is not specifically discussed in the regulations; an example is the Department’s requirement that accredited/approved ASPs report to the AE any harm to an adopted child within a specific period of time.

(E) Reviewing Complaints Against Agencies and Persons (22 CFR 96.7(a)(4), 22 CFR 96.41, and 22 CFR 96, Subpart J)

AEs will be required to process and review complaints submitted to the Complaint Registry, as well as complaints referred from other sources, including the Department. Internal complaint procedures shall be subject to approval by the Department.

Question 8: Describe how you propose to review and respond to complaints about an accredited/approved ASP. Specifically, address how you will ensure the timely processing of complaints submitted to the Complaint Registry; what types of complaints merit prioritized or expedited handling; how you will handle expedited processing; and what process for objection or response, if any, you propose to make available to the ASP against whom the complaint has been filed.

(F) Enforcing Substantial Compliance with Accreditation and Approval Standards/Taking Adverse Actions (22 CFR 96.7(a)(5) and (6) and 22 CFR 96, Subpart K)

An AE must impose adverse actions against an accredited/approved ASP when it determines there was failure to be in substantial compliance with the standards in 22 CFR Part 96, subpart F and the ASP may not maintain accreditation/approval. The types of adverse actions that an AE can take against ASPs are described in 22 CFR Part 96, subpart K. Such actions may include suspending, cancelling, or refusing to renew accreditation/approval; requiring specific corrective action; or imposing other sanctions, as discussed in 22 CFR 96.75. ASPs may challenge adverse actions, and pursuant to the IAA, AEs must defend themselves against suits brought for judicial review in Federal court.

Question 9: Describe your proposed methods for handling adverse actions. Propose specific corrective actions and other sanctions that may be taken or imposed in response to an ASP’s failure to substantially comply with accreditation/approval standards.

Question 10: Describe the process that you propose to use to determine if an ASP’s accreditation/approval should be suspended or canceled. Indicate what materials you would review as part of the process. Under what situations would suspension be appropriate? When would it be appropriate to cancel accreditation rather than continue to permit remedying of deficiencies?

Question 11: In the event that an ASP’s accreditation/approval is suspended, cancelled, withdrawn, or not renewed, or if the provider is debarred or otherwise ceases to operate, the AE may be required to assist and oversee the ASP in transferring cases and related records, pursuant to 22 CFR 96.7(a)(8) and 22 CFR 96.77(b). Describe how you will manage this situation when the ASP has active intercountry adoption cases. Specifically, describe how you believe pending cases should be handled and transferred and how the ASP’s records on completed and pending cases will be preserved and maintained. Describe what you would consider to be an effective case transfer plan and what measures should be in place to protect ASP clients.

(G) Collecting, Maintaining, and Reporting Data (22 CFR 96.7(a)(7))

22 CFR 96, Subpart M lists the data and additional information that AEs must report to the Department for inclusion in an annual report to Congress, as required by the IAA, and discusses records retention requirements.

Question 12: Describe how you will collect and report data to the Department, specifically addressing the following:

Your ability to retrieve, to maintain, to review, and to make information available to the Department.
Your ability to access and extract key pieces of data, e.g. how many and which ASPs are using the services of a certain foreign provider.
Your ability to manage the required data collection functions, including your information management, data processing, and recordkeeping capacity.
Whether you have prior experience collecting, processing, and maintaining similar types of data and, if not, your plan for developing the capacity to do so.
Your current ability to integrate the new data requirements into your operation’s current data management system and what enhancements, if any, you believe will be necessary to perform the data collection functions.

Question 13: Describe your proposed procedures for maintaining records on the ASPs that you accredit/approve; your ability to create and/or align technological resources with other designated AEs, as needed and appropriate; and your procedures for safeguarding sensitive or privacy-protected information. Describe how you would handle a breach of confidentiality and any comprise to electronic documents and information protected by HIPPA and the Privacy Act of 1974.

Question 14: 22 CFR 96.93(a) requires semi-annual reports of complaints to the Department for the prior six-month period and includes the requirement to report any discernible patterns in complaints received about specific agencies or person, as well as any discernible patterns of complaints in the aggregate. Describe the methods and procedures that will be used to meet this requirement, and your ability to conduct meta-analysis of your practices for this requirement or other aspects of your work as an AE.

(H) Standardized Procedures and Coordination

Question 15: Describe how you will encourage coordination across ASPs on matters of mutual interest or concern; ensure that all applications and on-site reviews are subject to uniform procedures for all ASPs; apply accreditation/approval standards consistently; and conduct monitoring and oversight functions equitably across ASP.

Question 16: How do you recommend coordinating with the Department and other AEs on the format and requirements for application forms and other decision-making materials, policies, and procedures, as well as staff training materials, to ensure consistency among AEs, if multiple are designated.

Question 17: If multiple AEs are designated, what are your recommendations for how the Department should assign jurisdictions to each?

(I) Communicating with the Department of State, other Designated AEs, and ASPs

AEs must communicate information to the Department about accredited/approved ASPs in accordance with 22 CFR Part 96, Subpart M. Such communication will include regularly updating the lists of accredited/approved ASPs, reporting on the results of complaint reviews, reporting on adverse actions taken against ASPs, recommending debarment of ASPs, providing information about case transfer plans, notifying the Department of cases involving disruption/dissolution and harm to a child, providing updates on the range of fees charged for services, and providing the information required for the IAA’s reporting requirements.

Question 18: Describe your recommendation for facilitating effective communication with the Department regarding concerns, observations, performance, and AE or ASP needs, and for addressing differing views on regulatory interpretation or application.

Question 19: Describe how you will communicate and collaborate with other designated AEs. Specifically address how you will develop and implement best practices, share information that may require consistency or application across all ASPs, and coordinate feedback and input to the Department.

Question 20: Describe how you will address ASP requests for training or guidance on the accreditation standards. How will you coordinate with the Department on matters pertaining to the interpretation and application of regulatory standards that ASPs do not understand?

(J) Guidance for Accreditation/Approval Applicants

Question 21: Describe what kind of guidance, if any, beyond the application form and its instructions, you would anticipate offering: a) potential accreditation/approval applicants to assist them in completing meaningful and useful applications and self-evaluations, and b) currently approved/accredited ASPs who have questions about the interpretation or application of specific standards and who have been unable to resolve their questions through review of the regulations.

(K) Hiring and Training for Evaluators and Others

Question 22: Describe your ability to recruit and train sufficient numbers of qualified individuals to undertake the functions described in this RSI, including what skills, experiences, and qualifications you would require of evaluators and others who perform key functions. Describe the types of training you would develop and provide for staff and evaluators to prepare them for the processing of applications; evaluating first-time and renewal applicant ASPs; conducting site visits; and executing monitoring and oversight responsibilities. Explain how your recruiting and hiring practices will guard against potential conflicts of interest.

(L) Public Information about Complaints and General Performance (22 CFR 96, Subpart M)

Question 23: Describe your strategy and procedures for how you will manage public inquiries, generally from prospective and adoptive parents, regarding the performance of accredited/approved ASPs? In particular, how will you make information about accreditation/approval status and adverse actions available to the public?

Budget and Proposed Fee Schedule

The Department provides no funds to AEs for the process of accrediting/approving and monitoring/overseeing ASPs. The AEs may recoup the costs of providing the accreditation/approval services by charging fees, as discussed in 22 CFR 96.8. When considering budgets and fee schedules, AEs may want to consider the following issues: acquiring and training staff and evaluators; preparing policies, internal procedures, and application forms; aligning policies and procedures and general collaboration with other designated AEs; processing applications (including performing site visits); providing counseling and training to applicants; monitoring compliance after accreditation or approval and until renewal; reviewing and handling complaints (which may include site visits); monitoring and overseeing compliance with accreditation/approval standards; imposing corrective and/or adverse action; training accredited/approved ASPs in coordination with the Department; travel and maintenance costs for standards evaluators; handling publicity, public relations, and public inquiries; litigation; assembling, collecting, and submitting required data; overseeing the appropriate transfer of pending cases and records of ASPs whose services under the Convention have been terminated through adverse action, closure, or other action.

An AE’s fee schedule must be approved by the Department and may not exceed the aggregate costs for providing accreditation/approval services and conducting monitoring and oversight responsibilities for a projected number of applicants. The Department understands that in the absence of more detailed information about the actual number of applicants, it may be difficult to project a fee schedule; therefore, the fee schedule will be discussed and prepared concurrently during the discussions between the Department and any applicant on the terms of the MOA. An AE may modify the schedule of fees, if justified, subject to the Department’s approval.

The projected budget of all applicants should identify all costs involved in fulfilling the tasks set out in the accreditation regulations outlined in this RSI. The costs should include the development costs that will be incurred prior to receipt of fees from applicants. The budget should reflect planning for these tasks.

AE applicants should consider how the transfer of ASPs from one AE to another would potentially impact the budget and fee schedule.

Question 24: Please project a budget for handling the tasks outlined in this RSI. For reference, please include a current budget for your organization’s accreditation or licensing program, if applicable. If you are a new entity, please provide a business plan that includes a projected budget and a detailed plan for financing startup operations.

Question 25: Based on this projected budget, please propose an estimated fee schedule for accreditation/approval services (including renewal of accreditation/approval services) and separately, for monitoring and oversight. The allowable fees are listed in subpart B of the accreditation regulations.

Question 26: How you would take the differing circumstances, such as geographic location, agency size, number of country programs and/or cases handled, revenue from adoption services provided, and budget size of applicants into account when assessing fees?

(M) Qualifications of Personnel

Question 27: Provide information about the qualifications of the existing personnel and/or any personnel that may be recruited and hired and who would be responsible for the tasks described in this RSI.

Provide the names, job assignments, and resumes of persons whom you may assign to key positions (for example, the executive director or project manager, the liaison with the Department, the attorney responsible for enforcement and adverse actions, the individual responsible for training and recruiting site evaluators, and the individual responsible for communication with and training of ASPs).
Identify all positions that will be created to perform the required tasks, what the required qualifications of each position will be, and indicate which positions will be specifically assigned tasks to implement the MOA.
Explain your ability to recruit, train, and supervise a sufficient number of appropriately trained individuals to act as standards evaluators and to undertake the on-site component of accreditation/ approval and monitoring and oversight.

(N) Past Practices

Question 28: Provide the following information for the previous ten-year period, unless otherwise stated:

Any instances where your organization has permanently lost the right to provide accrediting or licensing services, under any present or any former names, including the basis for such action(s);
Any instances where your organization’s license or charter was suspended for cause or where your organization was penalized by an oversight body, including the basis and disposition of such action(s);
Any formal, written complaints against your organization in the past five years by those who have used its services, including the basis and disposition of such complaint(s);
Any past or pending investigations, criminal charge(s) or convictions, malpractice complaints or lawsuits against your organization, including the basis and disposition of such action(s);
Any convictions or current investigations of the senior management of your organization for acts involving financial irregularities;
Any instances where your organization has filed for bankruptcy or lost its nonprofit status.

O. Safeguards Against Conflicts of Interest or Appearance of Conflicts of Interest

Question 29:

Describe any actual or apparent conflicts of interest that might arise in your performance of the duties outlined in this RSI. When responding, please consider any relationship your entity may have with, or support your entity may receive from, adoption agencies or membership organizations of adoption agencies, organizations of attorneys or social workers, or other organizations or individuals who might apply to your entity for accreditation or approval, regardless of whether that relationship or support is publicly known.
In the event there are such relationships or support that may involve an actual or apparent conflict of interest, what steps are you prepared to take, including termination of that relationship or support, if you are designated as an AE.
Explain whether and how you can demonstrate that you operate with independence and autonomy from any agency, person, or membership organization(s) that provide adoption services or otherwise have a vested interest in decisions pertaining to accreditation/approval, monitoring/oversight, and/or adverse actions.
Describe how you will ensure that your review systems and decision-making processes are free of conflict of interest or undue influence, both in appearance and fact.

Categories

Search REFORM Talk

Recent Comments

DOS: Request for Statements of Interest for Accrediting Entities

Submit a Comment Cancel reply