Upload
lawrence-allen
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Moving Towards Sustainability: The Journey Continues
COAGSMH MeetingJanuary 31, 2014
2
Agenda
Our Time Together
Welcome and Introductions
The Journey Towards Sustainability
CalMHSA Partner Updates
Capitalizing on Innovation
Taking the Show on the Road
Continuing the Discussion
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Staff, members, and those calling in
The Journey So Far: Assessing Where We AreRecap of last meeting:
focus areas and next steps
Review agenda adjust as needed
4
Goals for the Day
Seek
Contribute
Collaborate
Innovate
Build
6
Making Change
7
Collective Impact
7
8
CalMHSA Updates
9
Capitalizing on Innovation
Fostering Partnerships
Mobile Applications
Other Strategies
CAPITALIZING ON INNOVATION: SHARING KNOWLEDGE WITH COMMUNITY COLLEGES
Sally Jue, MSW
11
Building Collaborative Relationships:
Community Colleges County Mental Health DepartmentsLocal Mental Health Providers
12
Challenges
Finding local resources Finding the right DMH contact Competing priorities—no time or
resources Not getting a response
13
Success Factors
Committed, persistent, patient individuals In person initial meeting Identified mutual benefits and incentives Clear immediate and long term
expectations, especially re: communication College participation in local MH community DMH and CBO on campus activities Sustainable infrastructure
14
Innovative CBG Activities
Santa Monica College and Los Angeles County DMH case conferences
Los Angeles College Consortium and LAC DMH Strategic Action Plan
Campus based mental health intern programs
Wellness centers Coping skills and support groups
provided by community providers on campus
15
Knowledge Transfer Ideas
Webinars Case studies CCC and DMH collaboration toolkit
16
Taking the Show on the Road
Review Existing Data
Determine Key Messages and Best Ways to Share Findings
Next Steps
Maximizing Our Data and Sharing Our Results
USING DATA IN PRACTICEA BRIEF OVERVIEW
Bob Saltz, PIRE
18
Purposes of Evaluation/Evaluation Questions
Produce information in order to enhance management decision-making
Improve program operations Maximize benefits to clients: to what
extent and how well was the policy/program implemented?
Arden Handler, DrPHProfessor, Community Health SciencesUniversity of Illinois at Chicago
19
Purposes of Evaluation/Evaluation Questions
Assess systematically the impact of programs/policies on the problems they are designed to ameliorate How well did the program/policy work? Was the program worth its costs? What is the impact of the program/policy on
the community?
20
Two Main Types Of Evaluation
Process or formative
Outcome or summative
21
Process or Formative Evaluation Did the program/policy meet its process
objectives? Was the program/policy implemented as
planned? What were the type and volume of
services provided? Who was served among the population
at risk?
22
Why Do We Do Process Evaluation? Process evaluation
Provides feedback to the administrator regarding the program
Allows others to replicate the program if program looks attractive
Provides info to the outcome evaluation about program implementation and helps explain findings
23
Outcome or Summative Evaluation Did the program/policy meet its outcome
objectives/goals? Did the program/policy make a
difference?
24
Outcome or Summative Evaluation What change occurred in the population
participating in or affected by the program/policy?
What are the intended and unintended consequences of this program/policy? Requires a comparison group to judge
success What impact did the program/policy
have on the target community? Requires information about coverage
25
Why Do We Do Outcome Evaluation?
We want to know if what we are doing works better than nothing at all
We want to know if what we are doing new works better than what we usually do
26
Summary
However, the ability to translate evaluation findings into good programs and policy does not only depend on quality data, but on political will
27
Integrated Model of theResearch – Policy Relationship
ContextPolitical and Institutional structuresInterests and roles of stakeholders
EvidenceCredibility of the researchActive engagement with research
LinksClose links between researchers and policy-makersPerceived expertise or legitimacy
28
Supporting the Use ofResearch in Practice
Research must be translated Ownership is key Need “enthusiasts” Contextual analysis Credibility Provide leadership Develop integration
29
Types of Questions We Plan to Address for SMHP
Assessment questionsincl. key subgroups
Immediate or proximal impact of program components
Ultimate impact of program components
29
30
Types of Data
Basic Descriptive Data Campus Infrastructure Prevention & Early Intervention Activities Basic Outcome Data
30
31
Sources of Data
Training Surveys Kognito Online Training Survey Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) Survey (CARS-developed) CCC Campus Training Survey (RAND-developed) RSF Survey and materials (RAND-developed)
Pre/Post Comparison Surveys Capacity Survey of Mental Health Services (PIRE-developed) ACHA/NCHA Survey CalMHSA Higher Education Student Survey (RAND + PIRE-
developed) CalMHSA Higher Education Faculty/Staff Survey (RAND-developed)
Regular Reporting (CBGs only) Monthly Progress Report Quarterly Report
31
32
EXAMPLES OF DATA COLLECTED TO DATE
33
Campus Climate for Specific Groups of Interest: Faculty Veterans Students At Risk On Campus At Risk M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Students with physical disabilities 4.4 (0.8) 4.2 (0.8) 4.3 (0.9) Students with mental health issues 3.9 (0.9) 3.7 (1.1) 4.1 (1.0) Women students 4.7 (0.7) 4.5 (0.8) 4.5 (0.8) Racial/ethnic minority students 4.5 (0.8) 4.3 (1.0) 4.5 (0.9) LGBT students 4.3 (0.9) 4.2 (1.0) 4.3 (0.9) Students with different relig. beliefs and backgrounds 4.3 (0.9) 4.3 (0.9) 4.3 (0.9) Student Veterans 4.6 (0.7) 4.2 (0.8) 4.5 (0.9)
1=hostile, 2=somewhat hostile, 3=neutral, 4=somewhat welcoming, 5=welcoming
Kognito On-line Training Survey
34
Training & Technical Assistance
Training & Technical Assistance Topic Areas (N=337 TTA Assignments)
TTA assignment (n= 337)
Topic Areas N (%) a 11% or more of TTA Assignments
1. Campus outreach and awareness of resources 130 (39%) 2. Campus consultation, needs assessment, TTA identification 100 (30%) 3. CBG support 47 (14%) 4. Outreach and marketing to external/internal partners 40 (12%) 5. Culturally competent service delivery (e.g. targeting Asian/Pacific Islanders,
LGBT, foster youth and other underserved populations) 38 (11%)
5% to 9% of TTA Assignments
6. Student mental health training and awareness (e.g. identification & referral) 30 (9%) 7. Regional strategizing forum (planning, implementation, or facilitation) 29 (9%) 8. Campus dissemination and sharing resources with each other 26 (8%) 9. Threat assessment (planning development and implementation) 16 (5%) 10. Building campus infrastructure 18 (5%)
35
Quarterly Reporting ToolProgress on Major Activities: Number of Campuses Reporting a Lot of Progress or Nearly/Fully Complete, by Quarterly Reporting Period
0 5 10 15 20
System for campus threat assessment
Leveraging MH services resources
Increasing P-to-P opportunities
Campus-wide assessment of need
Collaboration with other campuses
Establishment of ID/referral system
Developing resources
Providing suicide prevention training
Relationships with county MH
Providing mental health training
Q1
Q2
Q3
36
Capacity Survey (baseline)
Structure on Campus for Mental Health Services (Q2) Does your campus have a health center on campus that provides mental health services? (valid n = 75)
Response # Valid %
No 8 11
Yes, mental health services are provided within a health center 48 64
Yes, mental health services are provided within a separate mental health center 15 20
Does not have a health or mental health center that provides services, but has another office on campus that faculty, staff or students would contact related to student mental health issues or concerns
4 5
37
Capacity Survey (baseline)
Types of Mental Health Services Present at Baseline (Q3) As of July 1, 2012, did your campus provide or support the following mental health services (valid n ranged from 72 to 75)
Response (abbreviated in some cases) % Yes
a) System in place for staff to refer students of concern to needed mental health services
89
b) Faculty / staff / student suicide prevention gatekeeper training 37 c) Suicide prevention policies 32 d) Threat assessment protocols 41 e) Stigma & discrimination reduction activities related to accessing mental health
services 52
f) Mental health service resources available on college website 80
38
Capacity Survey (baseline)
Categories of staff who provide mental health services to students (valid n = 28 to 52) (Q13) Of all staff on your campus who provide mental health services to students, how many fall within each of the following categories Average
Number of respondents who reported this type
Number of psychiatrists or other licensed prescribers 0.8 31
Number of full-time mental health counselors/therapists 0.6 36
Number of part-time mental health counselors/therapists 3.4 51
Number of mental health counseling interns 2.6 52
Number of nurses 3.0 50
Number of other types of staff 1.6 28
SNAPSHOT OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
MARCH 18, 2011REVISED JANUARY 29, 2013
Becky Perelli, RN, MS
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT OUR STUDENTS? Health Services Association of California Community Colleges
ACHA-NCHA II 2010 Consortium Project
41
ACHA – NCHAAmerican College Health AssociationNational College Health Assessment
The ACHA-National College Health Assessment (NCHA) is a nationally recognized research survey that can assist us in collecting precise data about students’ health habits, behaviors, and perceptions and covers a wide range of health issues -
Alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use Sexual health Weight, nutrition, and exercise Mental health Personal safety and violence
42
ACHA – NCHAAmerican College Health AssociationNational College Health Assessment
Since spring 2000 > 825,000 students/550+ colleges and universities across the country have taken the survey.
Used by two- and four-year public and private institutions from varied geographical regions, Carnegie Foundation Classifications, and campus settings.
43
• North N=7• Central
N=3• South
N=4
Participating CCC Campuses
Spring 2010
44
ACHA-NCHA IIHSACCC Consortium – Spring 2010
14 Colleges N = 11,386 Students F 52.7% M 41.6% Tr 0.3% Av Age - 24.20 Age >24 – 26% Part time status – 30.5% Live w/Parent/guardian –
64.4% Work hours for pay – 61.2
%
45
ETHNICITY
ACHA-NCHA Cohort
White 39.4%
Black – not Hispanic 4.3%
Hispanic/Latino(a) 26.4%
Asian/Pacific Islander 20.7%
American Indian/
Alaskan Native/
Native Hawaiian 1.9%
Biracial/Multiracial 5.1%
Other 5.7%
STATEWIDE
White31%
African American7%
Hispanic30%
Asian 11%
Pacific Islander0.5%
Filipino 3%
American Indian/Alaskan
Native 0.5%
Multiracial 1%
Unknown 16%
46
MENTAL HEALTH OF CCC STUDENTS
47
Top 10 Factors CCC Students ReportImpact Academic Performance
0
10
20
30
48
Mental Health Experience anytime in last 12 Months
Overwhelmed 72.8% Exhausted (not physical activity) 69.0 Very Sad 57.3 Very Lonely 50.7 Hopeless 48.4 Overwhelming Anxiety 43.7 Overwhelming Anger 43.3 So Depressed difficult to function 33.9 Seriously considered suicide 8.2 Intentionally injured self 7.4 Attempted suicide 2.6
49
Mental Health Experienceanytime in last 12 months
Traumatic/Difficult to Handle
Diagnosed or Treated by Prof.
Anxiety 9.4% Depression 9.4% Panic Attacks 5.1 Insomnia 4.9 ADHD 3.7
010203040
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CCC HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES?
HSACCC Annual Survey 2012-2013
51
HSACCC Annual Survey 2012-2013
34 colleges participated Data on seven major areas of query
Demographics Compliance Funding Stability Professional Staffing Scope of Services Outcome Measurement Mental Health Services
52
Scope of Services
70% of colleges have an internship training program as part of their mental health services
Of the mental health interns working in community colleges, 30% of them receive pay for their work
MFT; 52.0%LCSW,
15.0%
Pre/Post- Doc Psyc
h, 41.0%
Mental Health
53
Scope of Services
35% report providing SBIRT services Screening, Brief
Intervention, Referral and Treatment for Alcohol and Other Drug use
11% offer on-line alcohol education tools
35% offer on-line mental health screening
82% reported having a Behavioral Intervention Team
61% have well-defined policies and Threat Assessment protocol
Top 4 Functions – Faculty & staff consultations Receiving, responding to &
tracking reports Staff development trainings &
workshops Facilitating meetings with
students in distress
Drug & Alcohol ProgramsBehavioral Intervention Teams
Mental Health Services
96% Individual Therapy
93% CMH Referrals 89% Crisis Drop-in
Visits 81% Classroom
Presentations
71% of Colleges Total
Unduplicated Visits
6800 Students
Services Provided Respondents Reporting Average Number of Visits
Respondents – 27 of 34 Colleges (21% did not respond)
OPPORTUNITIES………
GOAL: STUDENT SUCCESSHSACCC Consortium - ACHA-NCHA II SP2010
57
LUNCH
MOVING TOWARDS ACTION
Finalize the Letter of Support
Sustainability: What Are We Hoping is on the Long-term
Horizon?
o What are feasible long-term goals for the COAGSMH?
o What is feasible to sustain for the CCC system?
o What are the strategies to achieve?
o What are the next steps?
59
60
The Journey Continues
Summary
Next Steps
Agenda Items