County-Specific Resources for County Plan Approval and Provider Certification Portal Submissions

County Portal Submissions as Easy as 1, 2, 3!

County Partners:
Thank you for your continued commitment to implementing the California High Fidelity Wraparound (HFW) Model and for your leadership in preparing submissions through the County Plan Approval and Provider Certification Portal. Counties play a critical role in establishing expectations, supporting providers, and monitoring fidelity to the HFW Standards across systems.

This resource provides county-specific guidance and examples of Description of Practice responses for county plan approval Portal submissions. These examples are designed to reflect how counties could develop a Description of Practice response that demonstrates their plans for oversight of and support for the HFW provider. County Description of Practice responses will vary depending on their HFW service model.

County High Fidelity Wraparound Service Delivery Models

Counties may implement High Fidelity Wraparound through three delivery models: 

  1. With a county-operated provider only,
  2. With a contracted provider(s) only, or
  3. A hybrid approach that includes both a county-operated HFW provider and a contracted provider

Counties utilizing the county-operated HFW provider only model or the hybrid model will have a 2-part Description of Practice response for each of the Standard requirements for most of the Portal Submission:

  • Part 1 is a Description of Practice response detailing the county’s plan for oversight and support of the HFW provider, and
  • Part 2 is a Description of Practice response detailing the county-operated HFW provider’s plan to implement the direct service of HFW

Note: Counties using the hybrid or contracted provider models will not need to include a Description of Practice response regarding the contracted providers plan to implement HFW. Contracted Providers are creating their own Portal submissions for program certification. 

Counties utilizing the Hybrid model (county-operated and contracted HFW providers), the Description of Practice responses regarding oversight should:

  • Clearly distinguish which policies and practices apply to county-operated providers, and which apply to contracted providers if they differ, or 
  • Clearly state that the same policies and practices apply across all models

Description of Practice Tips: Description of Practice responses are:

  • Typically 2-3 sentences in length (can be longer when supporting documents are drafts or need revising)
  • Use lettered bullets (a., b., c.) to match the description to each requirement of a Standard
  • Contain the name of the supporting document and the page number where the information can be found
  • Provide distinction from county oversight and county provided direct service delivery

County-Specific Description of Practice Response Examples

Standard 1.1 Timely Engagement and Planning
1.1a. First contact with families is made as soon as possible, but no later than 10 calendar days after referral (or self-referral in the case of AAP eligible child)
Expand All | Collapse All
  • County Operated HFW Provider Only (No Contracted Providers)
  • Part 1: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County's Plan for Oversight and Support of the HFW Provider
    1.1a Referrals are entered into the county’s internal tracking system. Oversight of the 10 calendar day timeline is managed through monthly reports pulled from the tracking system. 
    See Referrals and Engagement Policy and Procedure pages 10-11

    Part 2: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County-Operated HFW Provider's Plan to Implement the Direct Service of HFW
    1.1A The Intake coordinator begins outreach to the family within 24 hours of any referral. The family is assigned to a facilitator who assumes contact efforts and documents all attempts in the county tracking system. The HFW supervisor reviews progress of referrals and engagement on a weekly basis to ensure contact with families is made within the 10-day mandate.
    See Intake Procedures page 4
  • Contracted HFW Provider(s) Only (No County-Operated Provider)
  • Part 1: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County's Plan for Oversight and Support of the HFW Provider
    1.1a Referrals are entered into the county’s Wraparound tracking system and assigned to a contracted provider. The assigned provider documents all outreach attempts and the date of first successful contact using the county’s tracking system. The county Wraparound liaison reviews data through a weekly report to identify any cases approaching or exceeding expected timeframes.
    See Early Engagement Policy and Procedure page 2

    Part 2: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County-Operated HFW Provider's Plan to Implement the Direct Service of HFW
    *N/A – Counties do not need to include a Description of Practice response from the contracted provider. Contracted providers create their own certification submission to the Portal.
  • Hybrid Model (County-Operated and Contracted Providers)
  • Part 1: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County's Plan for Oversight and Support of the HFW Provider
    1.1a Referrals to the contracted provider are sent via encrypted email and oversight of the 10 calendar days timeline for contact is managed by a quarterly review of the contracted providers records. Contracted providers are required to track dates of all efforts to contact the family throughout the Wraparound process. 
    See Early Engagement Policy page 2

    For the county-operated provider, referrals are entered into the county’s internal tracking system. Oversight of the 10 calendar day timeline is managed through monthly reports pulled from the tracking system. 
    See Referrals and Engagement Policy and Procedure pages 10-11

    Part 2: Description of Practice Response Detailing the County-Operated HFW Provider's Plan to Implement the Direct Service of HFW
    1.1a. A referral is assigned to a Facilitator within 24 hours of receipt. The Facilitator begins outreach to the family and notifies the Supervisor withing 5 days of attempting to contact the family if there are any issues with reaching the family.  The Facilitator documents all attempts to contact the family in the county tracking system. The supervisor reviews progress of referrals and engagement on a weekly basis.
    See Intake Procedures page 4

County-Specific Description of Practice Checklist

(For All County Submission Types)

This checklist is designed to help counties strengthen their “Description of Practice” responses before submitting in the County Plan Approval and Certification Portal. Counties are encouraged to use this tool as a final review step to ensure responses are specific, operationalized, and supported by documentation.

Strong responses clearly show how the county’s systems, processes, oversight, support, and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) efforts support high-quality Wraparound implementation across providers and partners.

1. County Oversight Is Clearly Stated

  • Describes what the County does and is not a restatement of the Standard
  • Reflects the County’s role(s) based on the selected service delivery model (i.e., oversight versus providing direct service)
  • Describes observable processes used by the County (i.e., reports, workflows, reviews, audits)
  • Identifies specific data fields, reports, dashboards, or tools used for monitoring
  • Describes how instances of out-of-compliance are identified
  • Explains what happens next when timelines or expectations are missed (i.e., supervision, provider check-ins, case reviews, technical assistance)

Each response includes:

  • Who – County role(s) responsible (i.e., Wraparound Coordinator, Supervisor, CQI Lead)
  • What – Specific actions taken (i.e., reviews, reports generated, follow-ups)
  • When – Defined timeframe or cadence (i.e., weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually)
  • How – Named systems, tools, reports, or review methods

2. All Requirements Are Fully Addressed

  • Each lettered Standard requirement (a, b, c, etc.) has a separate and complete response
  • All requirements are addressed for the County’s selected submission type(s) (i.e., detailing oversight versus detailing service delivery)
  • Each described practice is supported by at least one supporting document
  • Document names and page numbers are clearly cited and immediately follow the description of practice response for each Standard requirement
  • Supporting document aligns to the practice described
  • A reviewer could confirm the practice using the uploaded Supporting Documentation and/or the Description of Practice

3. Consistency Across Service Models (If Applicable)

  • Monitoring, accountability, flex funds access and use, and CQI expectations are consistent across HFW providers whether they are county-operated or contracted providers
  • Any differences in monitoring, accountability, flex funds access and use, and CQI expectations are clearly explained and justified
Final Reviewer-Readiness Tip

If your Description of Practice could reasonably apply to any county, it is likely too general. Strong submissions reflect your county’s real systems, schedules, tools, and decision-making routines.