Proposed Preliminary Statewide Full Service Partnership Classification System BASED ON STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK THIS REPORT IS THE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OVERSIGHT.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Essential Service #6 :. Refresher: Why learn about Essential Services? Improve quality and performance. Achieve better outcomes – improved health, less.
Advertisements

NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholde r to insert your own image. Cybersecurity.
The CGEN Project: Development, Implementation and Testing of Genetics Education Materials for Use in Community and Clinical Settings National Coalition.
State Plan for Independent Living UPDATE Overview, Impact and Involvement.
1 (DMH) Proposed Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Issue Resolution Process.
STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE Statewide Transition Plan for Compliance with Home and Community-Based Setting Final Rule 1 Public.
ULTCBC CONSUMER DIRECTION WORKGROUP WORKGROUP RECOMMENDATIONS Presented by Workgroup Facilitators: Roger Fouts, ODJFS Sue Fredman, ODJFS.
Purpose: Help plan for future MHSA efforts, and advise CCMH on Programs and priorities.
Identifying and Selecting Projects
© 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
1 © 2006 by Smiths Group: Proprietary Data Smiths Group Online Performance Review Tool Training.
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
Procurement Transformation State of North Carolina
Legal & Administrative Oversight of NGOs Establishing and Monitoring Performance Standards.
Coaching for School Improvement: A Guide for Coaches and Their Supervisors An Overview and Brief Tour Karen Laba Indistar® Summit September 2, 2010.
Bureau of Rehabilitation Services (BRS) Department of Rehabilitation Services (DORS) Understanding the State Plan for Vocational Rehabilitation and Supported.
Office of Primary Care and Rural Health State Primary Care Grants Program  Title 26, Chapter 18, Part 3  Rule number: R  The goal of the State.
Quality Improvement Prepeared By Dr: Manal Moussa.
Safe Harbors Quarterly Partner’s Meeting August 22, 2013 New Holly Gathering Hall.
Creating a Business Plan, Budget Development, and Fundraising Amy D. Miller, MPH Executive Director, Mobile C.A.R.E. Foundation Coordinator, Mobile Health.
1-2 Training of Process FacilitatorsTraining of Coordinators 5-1.
CREATING THE ENTERPRISE SOCIAL MEDIA GAME PLAN September 2013.
Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC (MHData) November 20, 2014 This webinar was funded by the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission.
Administrator Checklist Research and Training Center on Service Coordination.
Use of OCAN in Crisis Intervention Webinar October, 2014.
Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) What data will be included in the 2010 AHAR? October 1, 2009 – September 30, 2010 Seattle and King County.
County of San Diego Acute & Long-Term Care Integration Project (ALTCI) — Information Technology Assessment Findings and Recommendations June 22, 2005.
Why Use MONAHRQ for Health Care Reporting? May 2014 Note: This is one of seven slide sets outlining MONAHRQ and its value, available at
Behavioral Health Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Coordination Community Policy Advisory Committee Mental Health Services Act, Capital.
County of San Bernardino Department of Behavioral Health Mental Health Services Act Workforce Education and Training (WET)
California Learning Resource Network Bridget Foster Presentation to Software Publishers July 31, 2000 Bridget Foster Presentation to Software Publishers.
1 Community-Based Care Readiness Assessment and Peer Review Team Procedures Overview Guide Department of Children and Families And Florida Mental Health.
State Records Office of Western Australia.NET Proof of Concept Project Slideshow: Prototype Online Disposal Authority/Recordkeeping Plan System Project.
Open Data Future for Grants ANN EBBERTS, CEO AGA MIKE PECKHAM, DIRECTOR, DATA ACT PMO, HHS CHRIS ZELEZNIK, ENGAGEMENT LEAD, DATA ACT PMO, HHS.
California Statewide Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Projects Overview May 20, 2010.
Education, Training & Workforce Update FSP Training for Small Counties June 29, 2007 By Toni Tullys, MPA, Project Director, Regional Workforce Development,
Welcome! Please join us via teleconference: Phone: Code:
1 Women Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism Evaluation Indicators Bristol, November 2010 RG EVANS ASSOCIATES November 2010.
GAC-GNSO Consultation Group On GAC Early Engagement in GNSO PDP London Progress Report 22/06/2014.
To access the AUDIO portion of the webinar: Dial: Pass code:
Why Use MONAHRQ for Health Care Reporting? March 2015 Note: This is one of eight slide sets outlining MONAHRQ and its value, available at
Kelli Ham, Consumer Health Coordinator National Network of Libraries of Medicine, Pacific Southwest Region.
CHDP DIRECTOR/DEPUTY DIRECTOR TRAINING SECTION III EPSDT: A Comprehensive Child Health Program 1 7/1/2010.
NSW Mental Health Services Competency Framework (Draft) Statewide Consultation.
Draft Transition Plan for the Transfer of the Drug Medi-Cal Treatment Program Fourth Series: Stakeholder Meetings Department of Health Care Services Department.
Office of Performance Review (OPR) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Stephen Dorage.
Health eDecisions Use Case 2: CDS Guidance Service Strawman of Core Concepts Use Case 2 1.
Federal Support for World-Class Schools Gwinnett County Public Schools 4/18/13.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
1 Strategic Plan Review. 2 Process Planning and Evaluation Committee will be discussing 2 directions per meeting. October meeting- Finance and Governance.
PEI Regulations Overview: What’s Different and What’s the Same?
CT TEFT 1 November 5, Agenda Introduction Goal of Pilot Tier Piloting Activity to Pilot Role of Connecticut in the pilot Standards and Technologies.
State of Georgia Release Management Training
1 Community-Based Care Readiness Assessment and Peer Review Overview Department of Children and Families And Florida Mental Health Institute.
February 18, 2015 This webinar was funded by the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC).
California Department of Public Health / 1 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH Standards and Guidelines for Healthcare Surge during Emergencies How.
Challenge Grant Funding And SB  The Challenge Grant program is authorized by section (4), Florida Statutes, to provide grant funding to.
The Behavioral Health Education Center of Nebraska (BHECN) Kay Glidden, Assistant Regional Administrator.
Developing a Monitoring & Evaluation Plan MEASURE Evaluation.
44th Meeting of the Standing Committee Bonn, Germany, October 2015 Report on activities of the Strategic Plan Working Group Ines Verleye,
Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC (MHData) June 28, 2018
California Community Colleges Student Mental Health Program
Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC (MHData) June 7th , 2018
Proposed Budget Summary
Finance & Planning Committee of the San Francisco Health Commission
BCS Template Presentation February 22, 2018
Hands-On: FSA Assessments For Foreign Schools
1915(c) WAIVER REDESIGN 2019 Brain Injury Summit
Draft Charter Community of Practice for Direct Access Entities
Section 3 FOR HUD USE ONLY.
Presentation transcript:

Proposed Preliminary Statewide Full Service Partnership Classification System BASED ON STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK THIS REPORT IS THE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMISSION (MHSOAC), AGREEMENT 14MHSOAC008, DELIVERABLE 2. Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC (MHDATA)

How to Comment Please submit your comments via one of the following: Fill out the online survey ( Call Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC toll free at MHDATA ( ) or at to request a hard copy feedback form by mail or other accommodations if needed Comments must be received in writing by October 20, 2015.

Purpose of this Report Assess Full Service Partnerships (FSPs) on a statewide level in order to classify them in a meaningful and useful fashion. The classification system should ultimately enable consumers, clients, family members, providers, counties, other stakeholders, and the State to further understand the diversity of FSPs across California and to compare those which are comparable. The MHSOAC believes that this knowledge can be used to improve the overall quality of care provided in FSPs. Pg. 2

Background FSPs evolved from Assembly Bills (AB) 34 and AB 2034, and have included provisions of a comprehensive array of services aimed at reducing homelessness, incarcerations, and psychiatric hospitalizations. FSPs make up the largest portion of funding in the Community Services and Supports (CSS) component of the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA or the Act). FSPs are required to provide both mental health and non-mental health services, per the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 9 § Counties have been flexible in their implementation of FSPs within the constraints of the general guidelines established in the Act and regulations. Pp. 2-3

Uses of the FSP Classification System The FSP Classification System data would be both collected and utilized via an online FSP Classification System website. It is expected that various stakeholders would be able to use the classification system to address their unique objectives. The proposed system includes elements designed to describe FSP programs with the goals of: capturing variations and similarities between FSP programs; enabling better communication about FSP programs; facilitating the sharing of information between FSP programs; assisting public communication of program offerings; assisting consumers and families in finding FSP programs; assisting efforts to improve FSP program component availability and quality; increasing the ability to understand what works and for whom. Pp. 3-5

Guiding Questions Throughout the project, the following questions were used to guide and prioritize the collection of information. 1.What are the most meaningful ways to classify FSP programs across the state that would be beneficial to clients, family members, providers, the State and other stakeholders? 2.What characteristics/factors should the classification system be based upon? What data is needed to measure those characteristics/factors? 3.What is the best method for various stakeholders throughout the state to view and utilize a classification system to improve quality and services provided by FSPs? Pg. 6

Project Milestones 1.Propose a Preliminary Statewide FSP Classification System Based on Stakeholder Input 2.Report a Final Statewide FSP Classification System Based on Public Comment 3.Develop an Online Statewide FSP Classification System Website Design Specification 4.Develop and Deploy an Online Statewide FSP Classification System Website 5.Provide Statewide FSP Classification System Website Administrator and User Training and Technical Assistance Pg. 6

Development of Statewide FSP Classification System The following processes and procedures were used to develop the proposed Preliminary FSP Classification System. Announce/Introduce Project Confirm Volunteer Counties and Providers Meet with Project Advisory Committee Plan/Perform Site Visits Develop Survey Questions with Stakeholder Feedback Pp 6-11

Development of Statewide FSP Classification System Pp 6-11

Description of Preliminary FSP Classification System FSP Program Definition: The proposed Preliminary FSP Classification System allows counties the flexibility to create one or more ‘FSP Profiles’ for each of their DCR-defined FSP programs. Counties are encouraged to define an FSP Profile for each legal entity provider, but an FSP Profile may be associated with one or more legal entity providers who perform similar services, as determined at the discretion of the county. Pp 12-13

Description of Preliminary FSP Classification System FSP Classification System Categories, Components and Elements: The proposed Preliminary FSP Classification System includes 23 components designed to describe FSP programs with the goal of capturing impactful variations and similarities between FSP programs. Each element was included based on the stakeholder feedback process. Similar elements were organized into question blocks, which are referred to as program components. Program components were organized into the following five categories based on logic model concepts: FSP Profile Information FSP Assets FSP Targets & Inflow FSP Client-Directed Activities FSP Outcomes and Assessments Pp 13-14

Pg. 15

Description of Preliminary FSP Classification System Data Needed to Develop the System Information reported in the FSP DCR, three-year plans and via annual financial updates contain a broader definition and terminology of FSP programs than could be supported through the efforts to classify FSP programs in a meaningful way to meet the goals of this project. It is proposed that an annually updated survey would be used to collect information for all elements of the classification system. Pp 14-15

Description of Preliminary FSP Classification System Availability of the FSP Classification System: Online website with a secure and a non-secure area. Pp Secure AreaNon-Secure Area Access: Authorized county and/or provider staffAccess: Public Proposed Uses: Create FSP Profile Definitions Complete the FSP Classification System annual survey View information in the FSP Classification System Perform functions related to the FSP Classification System and data as needed Proposed Uses: View survey data of FSP programs Search FSP program survey information to locate programs by survey results Perform an automated comparison between two FSP programs to identify differences Utilize other functionality which shall be subsequently designed as the project progresses

FSP Classification System Survey Questions The FSP Classification System is proposed to be constructed through a web-based survey administered annually. The version of the survey presented in this report reflects the proposed content of the survey questions and response options to be included in the final version of the FSP Classification System, but the format (including the content layout, workflow and efficiency) will be greatly enhanced through the implementation of this content in the web-based programming environment at a later milestone in the project. Pp 16-29

Invitation for Public Comment Open Comment Period: September 21, 2015 to October 20, Commenters are requested to provide overall feedback on the project as well as comments for specific program elements defined in the FSP Classification System. We welcome feedback on all aspects of the project, and we have created a feedback survey in order to gather comments on specific sections of the proposed system. Please note that comments received by the closing date will be made available to the public.

How to Comment Please submit your comments via one of the following: Fill out the online survey ( Call Mental Health Data Alliance, LLC toll free at MHDATA ( ) or at to request a hard copy feedback form by mail or other accommodations if needed Comments must be received in writing by October 20, 2015.