
![]() |
Explanation of Priority Successor to "Bridge to Understandingtm" Shows best in Internet Explorer. May be distorted in Mozilla Firefox and other browsers |
||
|
FamilyLight sm will
always refer to whatever resources we believe are best for the client
being referred, regardless of any other factors. When we speak of
schools and programs, we will do so as objectively as possible. Those
principles are inviolate even when we give preference, which we will do,
for those who provide complete information as requested in our
questionnaire. However, in general the information requested in
the questionnaire is critical to our understanding of schools, programs,
and other resources and much of that is not available from other
sources. This means that
all other things being equal, we are more likely to visit, assess, write about
and refer to those service providers who do so.
A submission Our policy to favor those who submit complete responses to the questionnaire and keep them current may be controversial, and may be interpreted by some as a demand for a quid quo pro in order to refer. We want to put that to rest once and for all.
In
Tom Croke’s years working with young people – since 1958 if
you consider organized volunteer work, since 1968 if you consider full
time professional positions, and since 1993 if you consider only being
an educational consultant – he is strongly convinced that there is too
little transparency in this business and too many referrals by
professionals and too many decisions by parents are made on the basis of
far too little information.
Most parent decisions and referral decisions (unfortunately including
our own) are made on the basis of marketing presentations and
superficial visits to the site where services are rendered that are
arranged and controlled by marketing professionals. Tom Croke and
FamilyLightsm will make all decisions in our reviews and our
referrals based on what we believe will
be in the best interest of the young people at issue.
But we firmly believe that schools, programs and other services
that resist this kind of transparency should be considered only with
some caution. The
information provided here, in a format set from a consumer point of
view, should give referring professionals and direct consumers of
service a better opportunity to make sound decisions.
We
will always consider exceptions in the interest of clients, but in
general we believe it is in the interest of young people to refer to
those programs that give us the greatest amount of information.
We have only a finite amount of time and money to visit programs.
We view the time and money as an investment.
We do not see that it is ordinarily a wise use of that time and
money to invest it in examining those services
just on their terms when they won’t disclose on our terms.
Will we make an exception when we think investigating a
non-responding service offers something a client might need and might
not be as well provided by the available responding services?
Definitely. But we believe we have a responsibility to our
readers and our clients to place our priority on programs that are
transparent. Last updated April 2, 2009 |
|||
|
|
|||
| "Solutions, Not Just Referrals" | |||
|
For questions or comments regarding this website, email office@familylight.com |