Day 1
CCASSC Agenda Day 1 & 2
CCASSC Action Minutes Dec. 2015
County Fiscal Letter – Hal Budget Report
Continuum of Care Reform Overview Document
Pathways to Well-Being Document
Whole Person Care Document
Donna DeRoo Power Point Presentation on QI
Donna DeRoo PDCA Roadmap
Day 2
RFA Link
CCTA Report Out Field Advisor Flyer
CCTA Report Out Fed Case Review Flyer
CCTA Report Out Advanced Analytics Flyer
BAA Training System Study (John B. Cullen)
1
CCASSC AGENDA
February 18-19, 2016
Sea Venture Hotel
100 Ocean View Avenue
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
https://www.seaventure.com
Thursday, February 18, 2016 10:00 – Noon Director’s Roundtable
Welcome New Members/Introductions
2016 Budget Update
Update on State budget & current fiscal issues.
Hal Hunter, Deputy Director, Kings County
County Roundtable Issues
Homeless/Housing Services
AB403/CCR
“Pathways” (Katie A.) – Shared Training Plan
Whole Person Care
Noon – 1:00 PM Lunch 1:00 – 1:30 PM Welcome & Introductions (redux)
Review 12/15 Action Minutes
Additional Agenda Items? 1:30 – 1:45 PM Update: Poverty White Paper & CSAC Presentation with SJVPH
Directors
Patty Poulsen 1:45 – 2:45 PM Presentation: Performance Management & Quality
Improvement (PMQI)
Donna DeRoo, Assistant Director, Central California Center for Health and Human Services
2:45-3:15 PM Discussion and Potential Partnership: Central Valley Health Policy Institute (CVHPI) Leadership Institute and CCASSC
Donna DeRoo, Assistant Director, Central California Center for Health and Human Services
San Joaquin Valley Public Health Consortium
3:15 – 3:30 PM Break 3:30 – 4:00 PM CCR Implementation Support Needs: Needs Assessment
David and Patty
2
4:00 – 4:15 PM Future Meetings
Dates/locations reviewed Topics (CYC; additional RFA, CCR and/or CPM
presentations?)
4:15 ADJOURN
CCASSC AGENDA
February 18-19, 2016
Sea Venture Hotel
100 Ocean View Avenue
Pismo Beach, CA 93449
https://www.seaventure.com Friday, February 19, 2016
8:30 – 9:00 AM Breakfast 9:00 – 9:20 AM CCASSC Research Update Patty Poulsen
9:20 – 10:00 AM Presentation: Merced County’s “All Dads and All Moms Matter”
programs.
Scott Pettygrove, Director, Merced County HSA 10:00 – 10:30 AM University/CalSWEC Reports
CalSWEC
Fresno State
CSU, Stanislaus
CSU, Bakersfield 10:30 –10:45 AM Break 10:45 –11:45 AM Updates
RFA
CCTA
APS Training
IHSS Training
BAA Training System Study (John Cullen)
Noon ADJOURN
CCASSC Action Minutes
December 10-11, 2015
Pismo Beach, CA
In attendance: Day 1: S. Pettygrove, D. Foster, J. Rydingsword, H. Hunter, S. Bugay, K. Harwell, M.
Sawicki, R. Ringstad, J. Webb, L. Collins, C. Kothari, M. Miller, D. Neira, P. Poulsen, K. Woodard, S. Pearl,
C. Utez, D. Murphy. Day 2: V. Rondero Hernandez, J. Webb, L. Collins, C. Kothari, M. Miller, D. Neira, P.
Poulsen, K. Woodard, S. Pearl, C. Utez, D. Murphy
1. Confirmation of 2016 Chair-elect and 2016 Vice-Chair (2017 Chair elect):
o Delfinio Neira (Fresno County) is the 2016 Chair
o Chevon Kothari (Mariposa County) is the 2016 Vice-Chair
2. 2016 CCASSC Budget:
o Santa Barbara’s decision to withdraw from CCASSC beginning the 2016 membership
year was discussed. D. foster submitted a draft 2016 budget for consideration with a
reduction in operating costs to offset the loss of Santa Barbra’s membership dues
($11,500.00 reduction). No decision made as to whether budget reduction should be
adopted vs. use of annual surplus.
ACTION: Final decision on how to manage loss of S.B. County revenue will be
made at the February 2016 meeting.
3. Opportunities to Expand/ Develop CCASSC:
o Considerable discussion about the future of CCASSC and how it can learn and grow from
successes learned by other consortia (SACHS and BASSC). Most urgent need seems to be
development of a “Leadership Academy/ Institute”, something which both SACHS and
BASSC have in place. Other opportunities to learn from BASSC are of interest.
ACTION: It was suggested that an invite to have Trent Roher (SF County) join us
at a 2016 meeting would be good. His dual roles as BASSC Chair and CWDA
President give him great insight into how to sustain and grow
University/Agency/Consortium partnerships.
ACTION: Jim Rydingsword and David Foster will work on a formal invitation for
Trent.
ACTION: Jim & David will solicit questions/agenda items prior to Trent’s visit to
the group.
4. Linkages/Eligibility Engagement Training:
o David Foster indicated CCTA has an existing curriculum used with eligibility staff
in Madera County as part of Linkages.
ACTION: David will locate curriculum and provide outline/learning objectives to
CCASSC members.
5. April Meeting location:
o Chevon Kothari offered Mariposa County to host the April 2016 meeting.
ACTION: Stephanie Pearl will work with Mariposa staff on logistics.
6. Core 3.0 Presentation by Joanne Pritchard (CCTA):
ACTION: Joanne Pritchard will provide Stephanie Pearl with the latest copy of
the Core 3.0 Implementation Guide and time frames for her to distribute.
ACTION: Joanne will provide Stephanie with 3.0 team contacts and 3.0 County
“Lead” contacts for her to distribute. Please add/delete as needed and let
Joanne /David know about the changes.
7. APS Training
ACTION: Juliet Webb offered to contract the Governor’s APS Program Liaison
and invite her to a future CCASSC meeting for discussion.
February 4, 2016
COUNTY FISCAL LETTER NO. 15/16-45
TO: ALL COUNTY WELFARE DIRECTORS ALL COUNTY WELFARE FISCAL OFFICERS
SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2015-16 REVISED PERCENTAGE CALCULATION FOR THE 2011 REALIGNMENT PROGRAMS IMPACTED BY SENATE BILL (SB) 1020 (CHAPTER 40, STATUTES OF 2012) AND SB 1013 (CHAPTER 35, STATUTES OF 2012) AND ADJUSTMENT TO JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2016 PROTECTIVE SERVICES SUBACCOUNT
REFERENCE: GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 30027.6. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 30029.8. CFL NO. 14/15-40, DATED JANUARY 29, 2015
This letter informs counties of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 revised Protective Services Subaccount percentage distribution pursuant to Government Code section 30027.6.
Attachment I displays the FY 2015-16 revised Protective Services Subaccount base percentage distribution. This percentage includes each county’s FY 2014-15 Protective Services Subaccount base and the growth distributed by the State Controller’s Office (SCO) on December 24, 2015, (refer to website: California State Controller's Office: Fiscal Year 2014-2015).
Attachment II displays the necessary adjustments to the 2011 Realignment revenues required to correct distributions for the months of September 2015 through November 2015. These adjustments were reflected in the January 2016 and will be reflected in the February 2016 Local Revenue Fund distribution to counties. Each county’s final adjusted distribution percentage has been determined based on a percent to total of the revised base in the amount of $2.1 billion as displayed in Attachments I and II.
An additional amount of $32.7 million was set aside for distribution to the San Francisco County Welfare Department, the county designated to receive funding
CFL No. 15/16-45 Page Two
that will be used to reimburse the state for realigned contracts and services that will continue to be administered by the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) pursuant to Government Code section 30029.8.
The CDSS will continue to issue the federal fund advances as previously provided and will remain the single state agency for the administration of federal funding. The Department of Finance (DOF) is required to provide an annual county distribution schedule for the Protective Services Subaccount to the SCO, which is done in coordination with CDSS and County Welfare Directors Association. The DOF provided the revised county distribution schedule for FY 2015-16, consistent with the overall distribution percentages contained in Attachment I to SCO in December 2015.
If you have any questions regarding this CFL, please direct them to [email protected].
Sincerely, Original Document Signed By:
LILIA A. YOUNG, Chief Financial Management and Contracts Branch
Attachments
ATTACHMENT I
2011 REALIGNMENT
FY 2015-16 PROTECTIVE SERVICES SUBACCOUNT REVISED BASE
FY 2014-15 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2015-16
PROTECTIVE GROWTH PROTECTIVE SERVICES PROTECTIVE SERVICES
COUNTIES SERVICES DISTRIBUTED SUBACCOUNT SUBACCOUNT
SUBACCOUNT BY SCO ON BASE PERCENTAGE
BASE DIST. BY SCO DECEMBER 2015 REVISED REVISED
ALAMEDA $79,902,483.35 $5,853,797.69 $85,756,281.04 4.06575579% ALPINE $796,711.17 $68,219.09 $864,930.26 0.04100685%
AMADOR $1,595,317.25 $113,502.33 $1,708,819.58 0.08101614%
BUTTE $17,139,131.89 $1,168,416.83 $18,307,548.72 0.86797167%
CALAVERAS $2,507,268.08 $187,832.20 $2,695,100.28 0.12777629%
COLUSA $1,512,078.50 $108,627.10 $1,620,705.60 0.07683861%
CONTRA COSTA $44,551,456.38 $3,303,676.69 $47,855,133.07 2.26884004%
DEL NORTE $4,009,889.47 $289,522.01 $4,299,411.48 0.20383763%
EL DORADO $7,318,369.94 $542,340.71 $7,860,710.65 0.37268092%
FRESNO $46,818,085.81 $3,242,773.24 $50,060,859.05 2.37341481%
GLENN $2,865,702.14 $222,631.26 $3,088,333.40 0.14641971%
HUMBOLDT $11,249,940.89 $793,113.02 $12,043,053.91 0.57096828%
IMPERIAL $8,610,182.41 $694,272.29 $9,304,454.70 0.44112968%
INYO $1,467,558.64 $116,569.69 $1,584,128.33 0.07510446%
KERN $56,601,895.45 $3,887,489.60 $60,489,385.05 2.86783737%
KINGS $7,344,213.02 $546,272.81 $7,890,485.83 0.37409258%
LAKE $4,730,426.29 $305,090.66 $5,035,516.95 0.23873682%
LASSEN $3,466,591.46 $225,994.43 $3,692,585.89 0.17506767%
LOS ANGELES $626,615,393.52 $44,762,218.13 $671,377,611.65 31.83040797%
MADERA $6,441,300.90 $483,680.98 $6,924,981.88 0.32831747%
MARIN $6,255,257.06 $437,364.29 $6,692,621.35 0.31730112%
MARIPOSA $1,798,574.76 $136,752.42 $1,935,327.18 0.09175500%
MENDOCINO $10,062,231.48 $732,671.62 $10,794,903.10 0.51179271%
MERCED $14,030,912.20 $1,007,469.19 $15,038,381.39 0.71297852%
MODOC $989,307.02 $79,914.45 $1,069,221.47 0.05069242%
MONO $1,036,898.73 $82,877.29 $1,119,776.02 0.05308924%
MONTEREY $15,960,303.39 $1,087,866.39 $17,048,169.78 0.80826377%
NAPA $5,660,568.93 $400,850.88 $6,061,419.81 0.28737548%
NEVADA $3,342,500.67 $227,073.47 $3,569,574.14 0.16923561%
ORANGE $99,888,462.25 $7,245,227.49 $107,133,689.74 5.07927132%
PLACER $16,527,441.75 $1,222,351.08 $17,749,792.83 0.84152813%
PLUMAS $1,970,313.01 $144,637.56 $2,114,950.57 0.10027105%
RIVERSIDE $107,303,565.59 $7,861,089.01 $115,164,654.60 5.46002409%
SACRAMENTO $100,557,987.13 $7,071,612.89 $107,629,600.02 5.10278272%
SAN BENITO $2,223,676.94 $170,450.98 $2,394,127.92 0.11350701%
SAN BERNARDINO $104,412,582.25 $6,981,344.38 $111,393,926.63 5.28125166%
SAN DIEGO $139,290,964.65 $10,314,749.64 $149,605,714.29 7.09289502%
SAN FRANCISCO $43,151,422.13 $2,961,370.70 $46,112,792.83 2.18623466%
SAN JOAQUIN $38,185,581.93 $2,601,639.42 $40,787,221.35 1.93374618%
SAN LUIS OBISPO $15,592,178.30 $1,147,894.61 $16,740,072.91 0.79365671%
SAN MATEO $19,738,033.81 $1,501,013.58 $21,239,047.39 1.00695574%
SANTA BARBARA $14,901,699.22 $1,023,341.55 $15,925,040.77 0.75501556%
SANTA CLARA $73,832,173.61 $5,599,238.33 $79,431,411.94 3.76589002%
SANTA CRUZ $11,313,426.02 $759,926.72 $12,073,352.74 0.57240476%
SHASTA $13,240,250.49 $850,821.68 $14,091,072.17 0.66806603%
SIERRA $808,051.56 $67,960.53 $876,012.09 0.04153225%
SISKIYOU $3,449,336.23 $237,471.66 $3,686,807.89 0.17479373%
SOLANO $12,748,822.94 $912,733.53 $13,661,556.47 0.64770244%
SONOMA $22,707,727.46 $1,518,674.71 $24,226,402.17 1.14858799%
STANISLAUS $21,470,308.01 $1,606,017.62 $23,076,325.63 1.09406219%
SUTTER $6,210,488.50 $431,093.31 $6,641,581.81 0.31488130%
TEHAMA $5,967,426.38 $415,331.54 $6,382,757.92 0.30261031%
TRINITY $2,222,003.76 $181,450.44 $2,403,454.20 0.11394918%
TULARE $23,225,192.80 $1,692,043.44 $24,917,236.24 1.18134084%
TUOLUMNE $3,381,740.24 $229,403.95 $3,611,144.19 0.17120647%
VENTURA $22,089,824.84 $1,530,081.08 $23,619,905.92 1.11983365%
YOLO $9,719,891.54 $608,614.56 $10,328,506.10 0.48968056%
YUBA $7,184,393.20 $520,466.25 $7,704,859.45 0.36529192%
SAN FRANCISCO-59TH CO $32,721,000.00 $0.00 $32,721,000.00 1.55132188%
TOTAL $1,970,716,517.34 $138,516,933.00 $2,109,233,450.34 100.00000000%
TOTAL $166,175,042.48 $164,926,582.80 $216,125,774.48 $547,227,399.76 100.00000000% $166,175,042.48 $164,926,582.80 $216,125,774.48 $547,227,399.76 $0.00 ($448,027.26) $448,027.26 ($448,027.26) $448,027.26
2011 REALIGNMENT
JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2016 LOCAL REVENUE FUND (LRF) ADJUSTMENTS
ATTACHMENT II
A B B - A
ALAMEDA
$6,737,372.51 $6,686,755.17 $8,762,566.44 $22,186,694.12
4.06575579%
$6,756,271.41 $6,705,512.09 $8,787,146.19 $22,248,929.69
$62,235.57
$0.00 $31,117.79
$0.00 $31,117.78 ALPINE
$67,178.64 $66,673.93 $87,371.93 $221,224.50
0.04100685%
$68,143.15 $67,631.20 $88,626.37 $224,400.72
$3,176.22
$0.00 $1,588.11
$0.00 $1,588.11
AMADOR
$134,517.05 $133,506.44 $174,951.67 $442,975.16
0.08101614%
$134,628.61 $133,617.15 $175,096.76 $443,342.52
$367.36
$0.00 $183.68
$0.00 $183.68
BUTTE
$1,445,170.55 $1,434,313.10 $1,879,575.90 $4,759,059.55
0.86797167%
$1,442,352.29 $1,431,516.02 $1,875,910.49 $4,749,778.80
($9,280.75)
($4,640.37) $0.00
($4,640.38) $0.00
CALAVERAS
$211,412.69 $209,824.37 $274,961.46 $696,198.52
0.12777629%
$212,332.30 $210,737.07 $276,157.50 $699,226.87
$3,028.35
$0.00 $1,514.17
$0.00 $1,514.18
COLUSA
$127,498.37 $126,540.48 $165,823.24 $419,862.09
0.07683861%
$127,686.59 $126,727.29 $166,068.04 $420,481.93
$619.84
$0.00 $309.92
$0.00 $309.92
CONTRA COSTA
$3,756,576.08 $3,728,353.22 $4,885,769.26 $12,370,698.56
2.26884004%
$3,770,245.90 $3,741,920.35 $4,903,548.11 $12,415,714.36
$45,015.80
$0.00 $22,507.90
$0.00 $22,507.90
DEL NORTE
$338,113.63 $335,573.41 $439,747.57 $1,113,434.61
0.20383763%
$338,727.27 $336,182.44 $440,545.66 $1,115,455.36
$2,020.75
$0.00 $1,010.38
$0.00 $1,010.37
EL DORADO
$617,084.51 $612,448.40 $802,574.59 $2,032,107.50
0.37268092%
$619,302.68 $614,649.91 $805,459.52 $2,039,412.11
$7,304.61
$0.00 $3,652.30
$0.00 $3,652.31
FRESNO
$3,947,698.13 $3,918,039.39 $5,134,340.89 $13,000,078.41
2.37341481%
$3,944,023.07 $3,914,391.94 $5,129,561.14 $12,987,976.15
($12,102.26)
($6,051.13) $0.00
($6,051.13) $0.00
GLENN
$241,635.83 $239,820.44 $314,269.40 $795,725.67
0.14641971%
$243,313.02 $241,485.02 $316,450.73 $801,248.77
$5,523.10
$0.00 $2,761.55
$0.00 $2,761.55
HUMBOLDT
$948,594.33 $941,467.61 $1,233,733.30 $3,123,795.24
0.57096828%
$948,806.78 $941,678.47 $1,234,009.62 $3,124,494.87
$699.63
$0.00 $349.82
$0.00 $349.81
IMPERIAL
$726,010.05 $720,555.60 $944,242.18 $2,390,807.83
0.44112968%
$733,047.43 $727,540.11 $953,394.94 $2,413,982.48
$23,174.65
$0.00 $11,587.32
$0.00 $11,587.33
INYO
$123,744.46 $122,814.77 $160,940.93 $407,500.16
0.07510446%
$124,804.87 $123,867.22 $162,320.10 $410,992.18
$3,492.02
$0.00 $1,746.01
$0.00 $1,746.01
KERN
$4,772,668.36 $4,736,811.69 $6,207,289.80 $15,716,769.85
2.86783737%
$4,765,629.97 $4,729,826.17 $6,198,135.73 $15,693,591.87
($23,177.98)
($11,588.99) $0.00
($11,588.99) $0.00
KINGS
$619,263.59 $614,611.12 $805,408.69 $2,039,283.40
0.37409258%
$621,648.50 $616,978.11 $808,510.49 $2,047,137.10
$7,853.70
$0.00 $3,926.85
$0.00 $3,926.85
LAKE
$398,869.26 $395,872.58 $518,765.79 $1,313,507.63
0.23873682%
$396,721.01 $393,740.48 $515,971.80 $1,306,433.29
($7,074.34)
($3,537.17) $0.00
($3,537.17) $0.00
LASSEN
$292,302.78 $290,106.73 $380,166.38 $962,575.89
0.17506767%
$290,918.77 $288,733.13 $378,366.36 $958,018.26
($4,557.63)
($2,278.82) $0.00
($2,278.81) $0.00
LOS ANGELES
$52,836,171.63 $52,439,217.74 $68,718,252.41 $173,993,641.78
31.83040797%
$52,894,193.97 $52,496,804.16 $68,793,715.75 $174,184,713.87
$191,072.09
$0.00 $95,536.04
$0.00 $95,536.06
MADERA
$543,130.10 $539,049.61 $706,390.15 $1,788,569.86
0.32831747%
$545,581.70 $541,482.78 $709,578.67 $1,796,643.15
$8,073.29
$0.00 $4,036.65
$0.00 $4,036.64
MARIN
$527,442.89 $523,480.26 $685,987.51 $1,736,910.66
0.31730112%
$527,275.27 $523,313.89 $685,769.50 $1,736,358.67
($551.99)
($276.00) $0.00
($275.99) $0.00
MARIPOSA
$151,655.71 $150,516.34 $197,242.07 $499,414.12
0.09175500%
$152,473.91 $151,328.39 $198,306.20 $502,108.50
$2,694.38
$0.00 $1,347.19
$0.00 $1,347.19
MENDOCINO
$848,446.74 $842,072.43 $1,103,482.25 $2,794,001.42
0.51179271%
$850,471.75 $844,082.23 $1,106,115.96 $2,800,669.94
$6,668.52
$0.00 $3,334.26
$0.00 $3,334.26
MERCED
$1,183,085.66 $1,174,197.23 $1,538,710.63 $3,895,993.52
0.71297852%
$1,184,792.36 $1,175,891.11 $1,540,930.35 $3,901,613.82
$5,620.30
$0.00 $2,810.15
$0.00 $2,810.15
MODOC
$83,418.31 $82,791.59 $108,493.11 $274,703.01
0.05069242%
$84,238.15 $83,605.28 $109,559.39 $277,402.81
$2,699.80
$0.00 $1,349.90
$0.00 $1,349.90
MONO
$87,431.24 $86,774.37 $113,712.29 $287,917.90
0.05308924%
$88,221.07 $87,558.27 $114,739.53 $290,518.87
$2,600.97
$0.00 $1,300.48
$0.00 $1,300.49
MONTEREY
$1,345,771.81 $1,335,661.13 $1,750,298.78 $4,431,731.72
0.80826377%
$1,343,132.66 $1,333,041.82 $1,746,866.33 $4,423,040.81
($8,690.91)
($4,345.45) $0.00
($4,345.46) $0.00
NAPA
$477,298.82 $473,712.92 $620,770.58 $1,571,782.32
0.28737548%
$477,546.33 $473,958.56 $621,092.48 $1,572,597.37
$815.05
$0.00 $407.52
$0.00 $407.53
NEVADA
$281,839.45 $279,722.02 $366,557.87 $928,119.34
0.16923561%
$281,227.35 $279,114.51 $365,761.77 $926,103.63
($2,015.71)
($1,007.86) $0.00
($1,007.85) $0.00
ORANGE
$8,422,589.02 $8,359,310.79 $10,954,343.98 $27,736,243.79
5.07927132%
$8,440,481.27 $8,377,068.62 $10,977,614.48 $27,795,164.37
$58,920.58
$0.00 $29,460.29
$0.00 $29,460.29
PLACER
$1,393,592.88 $1,383,122.93 $1,812,494.44 $4,589,210.25
0.84152813%
$1,398,409.73 $1,387,903.59 $1,818,759.19 $4,605,072.50
$15,862.25
$0.00 $7,931.13
$0.00 $7,931.12
PLUMAS
$166,136.67 $164,888.50 $216,075.87 $547,101.04
0.10027105%
$166,625.46 $165,373.62 $216,711.58 $548,710.66
$1,609.62
$0.00 $804.81
$0.00 $804.81
RIVERSIDE
$9,047,830.08 $8,979,854.47 $11,767,526.91 $29,795,211.46
5.46002409%
$9,073,197.35 $9,005,031.15 $11,800,519.35 $29,878,747.85
$83,536.39
$0.00 $41,768.20
$0.00 $41,768.19
SACRAMENTO
$8,479,043.32 $8,415,340.95 $11,027,767.93 $27,922,152.20
5.10278272%
$8,479,551.35 $8,415,845.17 $11,028,428.67 $27,923,825.19
$1,672.99
$0.00 $836.50
$0.00 $836.49
SAN BENITO
$187,500.30 $186,091.63 $243,861.22 $617,453.15
0.11350701%
$188,620.32 $187,203.23 $245,317.90 $621,141.46
$3,688.31
$0.00 $1,844.15
$0.00 $1,844.16
SAN BERNARDINO
$8,804,062.55 $8,737,918.33 $11,450,485.03 $28,992,465.91
5.28125166%
$8,776,122.19 $8,710,187.89 $11,414,146.05 $28,900,456.13
($92,009.78)
($46,004.89) $0.00
($46,004.89) $0.00
SAN DIEGO
$11,745,005.61 $11,656,766.34 $15,275,449.29 $38,677,221.24
7.09289502%
$11,786,621.31 $11,698,069.38 $15,329,574.30 $38,814,264.99
$137,043.75
$0.00 $68,521.87
$0.00 $68,521.88
SAN FRANCISCO
$3,638,525.28 $3,611,189.33 $4,732,233.44 $11,981,948.05
2.18623466%
$3,632,976.37 $3,605,682.12 $4,725,016.59 $11,963,675.08
($18,272.97)
($9,136.48) $0.00
($9,136.49) $0.00
SAN JOAQUIN
$3,219,805.93 $3,195,615.79 $4,187,650.80 $10,603,072.52
1.93374618%
$3,213,403.54 $3,189,261.49 $4,179,323.91 $10,581,988.94
($21,083.58)
($10,541.79) $0.00
($10,541.79) $0.00
SAN LUIS OBISPO
$1,314,731.52 $1,304,854.05 $1,709,928.06 $4,329,513.63
0.79365671%
$1,318,859.37 $1,308,950.89 $1,715,296.71 $4,343,106.98
$13,593.35
$0.00 $6,796.67
$0.00 $6,796.68
SAN MATEO
$1,664,309.80 $1,651,805.98 $2,164,586.45 $5,480,702.23
1.00695574%
$1,673,309.13 $1,660,737.69 $2,176,290.89 $5,510,337.71
$29,635.48
$0.00 $14,817.74
$0.00 $14,817.74
SANTA BARBARA
$1,256,510.37 $1,247,070.31 $1,634,206.15 $4,137,786.83
0.75501556%
$1,254,647.43 $1,245,221.36 $1,631,783.23 $4,131,652.02
($6,134.81)
($3,067.41) $0.00
($3,067.40) $0.00
SANTA CLARA
$6,225,524.36 $6,178,752.50 $8,096,861.32 $20,501,138.18
3.76589002%
$6,257,969.34 $6,210,953.72 $8,139,058.97 $20,607,982.03
$106,843.85
$0.00 $53,421.93
$0.00 $53,421.92
SANTA CRUZ
$953,947.39 $946,780.46 $1,240,695.45 $3,141,423.30
0.57240476%
$951,193.85 $944,047.61 $1,237,114.22 $3,132,355.68
($9,067.62)
($4,533.81) $0.00
($4,533.81) $0.00
SHASTA
$1,116,417.11 $1,108,029.56 $1,452,002.11 $3,676,448.78
0.66806603%
$1,110,159.01 $1,101,818.47 $1,443,862.88 $3,655,840.36
($20,608.42)
($10,304.21) $0.00
($10,304.21) $0.00
SIERRA
$68,134.86 $67,622.97 $88,615.59 $224,373.42
0.04153225%
$69,016.23 $68,497.72 $89,761.90 $227,275.85
$2,902.43
$0.00 $1,451.22
$0.00 $1,451.21
SISKIYOU
$290,847.82 $288,662.70 $378,274.07 $957,784.59
0.17479373%
$290,463.56 $288,281.33 $377,774.30 $956,519.18
($1,265.41)
($632.70) $0.00
($632.71) $0.00
SOLANO
$1,074,979.97 $1,066,903.73 $1,398,109.34 $3,539,993.04
0.64770244%
$1,076,319.80 $1,068,233.50 $1,399,851.91 $3,544,405.22
$4,412.18
$0.00 $2,206.09
$0.00 $2,206.09
SONOMA
$1,914,714.19 $1,900,329.10 $2,490,260.15 $6,305,303.44
1.14858799%
$1,908,666.58 $1,894,326.92 $2,482,394.69 $6,285,388.19
($19,915.25)
($9,957.62) $0.00
($9,957.63) $0.00
STANISLAUS
$1,810,375.06 $1,796,773.85 $2,354,557.61 $5,961,706.52
1.09406219%
$1,818,058.31 $1,804,399.38 $2,364,550.38 $5,987,008.07
$25,301.55
$0.00 $12,650.78
$0.00 $12,650.77
SUTTER
$523,668.01 $519,733.73 $681,077.93 $1,724,479.67
0.31488130%
$523,254.13 $519,322.97 $680,539.65 $1,723,116.75
($1,362.92)
($681.46) $0.00
($681.46) $0.00
TEHAMA
$503,173.03 $499,392.73 $654,422.34 $1,656,988.10
0.30261031%
$502,862.81 $499,084.84 $654,018.88 $1,655,966.53
($1,021.57)
($510.78) $0.00
($510.79) $0.00
TRINITY
$187,359.22 $185,951.60 $243,677.73 $616,988.55
0.11394918%
$189,355.10 $187,932.49 $246,273.55 $623,561.13
$6,572.58
$0.00 $3,286.29
$0.00 $3,286.29
TULARE
$1,958,346.84 $1,943,633.93 $2,547,008.39 $6,448,989.16
1.18134084%
$1,963,093.64 $1,948,345.08 $2,553,182.04 $6,464,620.76
$15,631.60
$0.00 $7,815.80
$0.00 $7,815.80
TUOLUMNE
$285,148.13 $283,005.84 $370,861.11 $939,015.08
0.17120647%
$284,502.42 $282,364.98 $370,021.31 $936,888.71
($2,126.37)
($1,063.18) $0.00
($1,063.19) $0.00
VENTURA
$1,862,612.68 $1,848,619.02 $2,422,497.40 $6,133,729.10
1.11983365%
$1,860,884.04 $1,846,903.37 $2,420,249.15 $6,128,036.56
($5,692.54)
($2,846.27) $0.00
($2,846.27) $0.00
YOLO
$819,580.66 $813,423.22 $1,065,939.28 $2,698,943.16
0.48968056%
$813,726.88 $807,613.41 $1,058,325.90 $2,679,666.20
($19,276.96)
($9,638.48) $0.00
($9,638.48) $0.00
YUBA
$605,787.59 $601,236.36 $787,881.93 $1,994,905.88
0.36529192%
$607,024.00 $602,463.48 $789,489.99 $1,998,977.48
$4,071.60
$0.00 $2,035.80
$0.00 $2,035.80
SAN FRANCISCO-59TH CO
$2,763,379.05 $2,742,618.01 $3,594,026.09 $9,100,023.15
1.55132188%
$2,577,909.79 $2,558,542.16 $3,352,806.43 $8,489,258.39
($610,764.76)
($305,382.39) $0.00
($305,382.36) $0.00
FEBRUARY 2016 LRF ADJUSTMENT
FOR SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER
& NOVEMBER 2015
PROTECTIVE SERVICES
SUBACCOUNT DISTRIBUTIONS
JANUARY 2016 LRF ADJUSTMENT
FOR SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER
& NOVEMBER 2015
PROTECTIVE SERVICES
SUBACCOUNT DISTRIBUTIONS
DIFFERENCE
SEPTEMBER 2015 OCTOBER 2015 NOVEMBER 2015
TOTAL
LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL
REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE
FUND FUND FUND
REVISED REVISED REVISED
FY 2015-16
PROTECTIVE SERVICES
SUBACCOUNT
PERCENTAGE
REVISED
SEPTEMBER 2015 OCTOBER 2015 NOVEMBER 2015 TOTAL
LOCAL LOCAL LOCAL SEPTEMBER
REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE THROUGH
FUND FUND FUND NOVEMBER
RECEIPTS RECEIPTS RECEIPTS LRF RECEIPTS
COUNTIES
Presented by Sara Rogers
December 11, 2015
California’s Child Welfare
Continuum of Care Reform (CCR) Overview
California Department of Social Services
1
Context for Change:
• Proportion of children in Group Homes has remained fairly constant despite efforts to reduce it.
• Poor outcomes for children placed in group homes for long periods of time.
• Lawsuit settlement increased Group Home rates by 33% with no new requirements
Legislative mandate*: Reform Group Homes & FFAs with robust & diverse stakeholder input
Legislative report with recommendations
Builds on previous reform efforts: SB 933, RBS Reform * Senate Bill 1013 (Chapter 35, Statutes of 2012)
Background
2
• All children live with a committed, permanent and nurturing family
• Services and supports should be individualized and coordinated
• System focus is on achieving a permanent family and preparation for successful adulthood
• When needed, congregate care is a short-term, high quality, intensive intervention that is just one part of a continuum of care available for children, youth and young adults
Vision
3
• The child, youth and family’s experience is valued in:
– Assessment
– Service planning
– Placement decisions
• Children shouldn’t change placements to get services
• Cross system and cross-agency collaboration to improve access to services and outcomes
• Recognizing the differences in the probation system
Guiding Principles
4
Children in Resource Families
Children in Congregate
Care
The Goal:
Permanent Family
5
The Work Ahead…
CCR Report
AB 403
Preparation
• Policies
• Rates
• Outreach
• Orientations
• Tools
• Training
• Accountability
• Recruitment
• Performance measures
Pre-Implementation
• Applications
• Reviews
• Licenses
• Mental Health Certification
• Data testing
• Training & TA
Implementation: Children & families served differently!
•Extensions •Data collection •Monitoring •Technical Assistance •Policy Revision
1-1-17
Will take “a village”! CDSS will be collaborating with a wide array of stakeholders in the implementation work
6
Program & Licensing
Rate Structures
Oversight
Framework
Resource Family
Approval Training Mental Health
Deliverables
CCR Implementation Workgroups
Program Instructions
• Regulations
• ACLs/CFLs
• Forms
Capacity Building Activities
• Outreach Activities
• Communication Materials
• Training Curricula
• Mental Health Certification
• Readiness tools
Accountability & Oversight
Framework
• Accreditation Process
• Application review process
• Provider Performance
measures
• Consumer Survey
DRAFT
State/County Implementation Team
CDSS, DHCS, CWDA, CPOC, CBHDA, CSAC County Representatives
Stakeholder Implementation
Advisory Committee Providers, Youth, Caregivers, Tribes,
Advocates, Counties, Legislative Staff and others
Proposed CCR Implementation Framework
7
CCR Implementation Timeline
2016 Legislation
Licensure & Rate Setting of Providers
01/2016 01/2017 01/2018
Retention & Recruitment
Provider & Caregiver Readiness
Stakeholder Engagement
Initial Licensing
Resource Family Approval - Statewide Implementation
Oversight & Performance: FFAs & STRTCs
Data Measure & Methodology
Resource Family Approval - Early Implementation (Cohort 2)
Child Welfare & Probation Readiness
Outreach & Communication
Ongoing Training & Technical Assistance t
Assessment
Retention & Recruitment of Caregivers 2016
2017 Legislation
Initial Policy & Program Development
Legislative Reports and Updates
2018 Legislation.
Interim Standards
Regulations
Rates & Payments
Initial Training
8
Key Strategies
• Continuum of Care Reform is a comprehensive framework for changing the continuum of services that support children, youth and families across placement settings (from relatives to congregate care) in achieving permanency.
• Pillars for this framework include: – Increased engagement with children, youth and families
– Increased capacity for home-based family care
– Limited use of congregate care
– Systemic and infrastructure changes: rate structures, training, accreditation, accountability & performance, mental health services
9
Increased Engagement
• Child & Family Team
• Up-front and continuing assessment along common domains
• Aligns with the practice changes identified in California Child Welfare Core Practice Model (Statewide Practice Model) & Katie A
• Quality Parenting
Initiative (QPI)
10
Resource Family
Relative Caregiver
Foster Family
Adoptive
Family
Resource Family Approval:
• Related and non-related families
• Training for all families
• Resource Families still choose the role they play in the system: temporary or permanent
• Prepared for permanency-no additional approvals necessary
• Foster Family Agencies and residential care providers will also approve resource families.
Foster Families Resource Families
11
• Advancing Resource family approval statewide implementation.
• Additional funding for support, retention, recruitment and training of resource families & relatives for placing agencies ($17.2 million GF)
• Foster Family Agencies provide Core Services:
– May provide core services to children in county approved families
• Updated and expanded training requirements across provider and caregiver categories
• Approved Relative Caregiver (ARC) Funding Option Program (2014: $30 million investment)
Increasing Capacity for Home-Based Family Care
12
• Licensed residential care is re-envisioned to provide short term therapeutic care including “core services” that are designed to transition children quickly to a home setting.
• Residential care should only be used when intensive 24-hr care is required that can not be provided in a home based setting.
• Providers must immediately begin planning for a safe transition to a home based setting.
• Providers must have the capacity to approve resource families and to transition children and youth to a home setting safely (either directly, or through relationships with other providers).
Reducing Congregate Care
13
FFAs and STRTCs make available core services either directly or through formal agreements:
• Services shall be trauma informed and culturally relevant
• Ensure the delivery mental health services (specialty and non-specialty)
• Transitional support services for placement changes, permanency, aftercare
• Education, physical, behavioral and mental health supports
• Activities to support youth achieving a successful adulthood
• Services to achieve permanency & maintain/establish family connections
• Active efforts for ICWA-Eligible children
Core Services
14
• National Accreditation
• Cross Departmental Oversight Framework
• Evaluate provider performance along common domains
• Client satisfaction surveys
• Public transparency of provider performance
Oversight, Accountability & Provider Performance Measures
15
• New provider rate structure: – Sunset RCL system (1-14)
– Create new STRTC rate
– Create tiered FFA rate structure
• Multi-year implementation: – New requirements take effect 1/1/2017
– Provisions for extensions up to two years
– Additional extensions for providers and longer for those serving probation youth
Other Key Elements
16
• Questions can be sent to: [email protected]
• Additional information on the CDSS website at: http://www.cdss.ca.gov/cdssweb/default.htm
Questions and Contact Info
17
1
Continuum of Care Reform (CCR) Gap Analysis
As you think about implementation in your County, make a note of what elements you have in place in these two critical implementation areas:
What is in place to engage children, youth, families, resource families:
The gaps:
2
What is in place to build resource family capacity? The gaps?
3
Training Needs Related to Gaps
1
INITIAL DRAFT OF TRAINING PLAN
1/13/16
PATHWAYS TO WELL-BEING:
REALIZING AN INTEGRATED, CONJOINT TRAINING PLAN
Vision:
All public and professional organizations, community-based groups, and families shall have
access to a uniform series of foundational training resources that support the integration of
care provided by multiple organizations and the well-being of children in foster careand their
families.
Mission:
The integrated training plan aims to establish unifyunified the content necessary to understand
and provide the core services of an integrated practice model and encourages the conjoint
integrated delivery of foundational training regarding the mental health and well-being of
children in foster care across all partnering organizations and community-based groups that is
developed from shared values, philosophy and evidence-based practices for serving high-risk,
high-need children, youth and their families.
Guiding Principles:
The guiding principles for the development of the shared training plan are largely derived from
the desired implementation of evidence-based practices across multiple state and community-
based organizations in California. This desire is given extra urgency as the result of the recent
settlement of legal actions and legislative changes being implemented across the State.
Pathways to MentalBehavioral Health Services Core Practice Model Guide, with additions for
the encouragement of conjoint training. The shared training plan aims to address a need for
consistency of information regarding policy and practice expectations across all agencies,
partners, and families involved in the delivery, monitoring, and receipt of mentalbehavioral
health services for children in foster care. Consistency is considered an essential component of
fairness in service delivery. Further, the shared training plan seeks to provide access to families
and other community partners with the same foundational information about
mentalbehavioral health care for children in the foster care system as that received by
professional staff to support the concept of equality and shared responsibility for . The
combined emphasis on consistency and community education is believed to result in improved
well-being outcomes for children.
Comment [LF1]: Applies to children not yet in the foster care system as well and CCR will include probation youth. This will be useful to ensure that partners across the system of care who are involved know what is needed to ensure that foster youth and actually all youth receive care that reflects the state of the art service and that reflects evidence-based practices. Let’s establish this once and keep it up! While foster youth are certainly the current impetus, is it really necessary to limit our language in this way?
Comment [LF2]: This includes the changes in Child Welfare from the federal audit, the Katie A Settlement Agreement, the transfer of responsibility for 3632 services to education with special tracking of foster youth, and now, CCR.
2
To that end, the shared training plan will embrace the following principles for training content
and training delivery:
1. Promotion of Cross-System Training Delivery: Promotion of joint trainings and access to training resources for the child welfare and mentalbehavioral behavioral health workforces to enhance shared understanding, skills, values, and collaboration in the case management and service delivery processes.
2. Promotion of Conjoint Training Delivery: Promotion of conjoint training delivery for two or more types of audiences and uniform access to training resources for all agencies, community-based organizations, and families concerned with the well-being of children in foster care in order to promote shared understanding and build trusting relationships.
3. Collaboration: Advancement of collaborative processes between the child welfare and mentalbehavioral health workforces systems and the families with whom they are partnering to create positive outcomes.
4. Teaming: Promotion of team-based approaches among the child welfare worker, mentalbehavioral health provider, family, youth, and other involved organizations and individuals to provide consistent, quality case management and treatment services to address children’s mentalbehavioral health needs and to improve their mental healthsafety, permanence and well-being outcomes.
5. Evidence-based Practice: Promotion of the use of evidence-based and evidence-informed practices within the training plan, with emphasis on values, philosophy and practices that span the context and target populations within specific models. regarding collaboration, teaming, screenings, assessments, and other aspects of case management and treatment.
6. Trauma-informed Practice: Emphasis on skillful responses to the prevalent and pervasive influences of trauma on children’s and adults’ mentalbehavioral health and overall development.
7. Family and Youth Voice/Engagement: Support for the meaningful participation of families and youth in the curriculum development process and in the delivery of training to ensure deep understanding of the youth and family experience in service delivery.
8. Advocacy: Promotion of training and certification for parents, youth, and other partners to assist families with self-empowerment, resiliency, well-being, and navigation through the child welfare and behavioral health systems.
Coordinating Organizations:
The main coordinating organizations for the development and approval of the shared training
plan are:
California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS)
California Department of Social Services (CDSS)
Shared Management Structure’s Community Team, a group of community
representatives operating under the conjoint auspices of the California Department of
Comment [LF3]: Is there a difference between 1 and 2?
3
Health Care Services and the California Department of Social Services pursuant to the
Settlement Agreement for Katie A. v. Bonta
Pathways to Well-Being Workgroup, a subcommittee of the Statewide Training and
Education Committee (Pathways Workgroup)
DHCS and CDSS will provide oversight of the shared training plan and orchestrate connections
for the Community Team and Pathways Workgroup with other state, county, and partnering
agencies that have interest in the plan.
The Community Team or their designated participants will contribute their expertise and
experience as advocates, service providers, and service recipients involved in and concerned
about the public child welfare and mentalbehavioral health, or other involved systems within
the Integrated Training Plan and content development process.
The Pathways Workgroup will contribute their expertise in content development, training
delivery, and knowledge of existing training products for topics related to the shared training
plan.
Goals of the Coordinating Organizations:
1. Develop a shared, integrated training plan that specifies a series of foundational topics for the practice areas of child welfare and behavioral health concerning the mentalbehavioral health and well-being of children in the foster care system and other public systems that serve them and their families.
a. Topics will encompass knowledge, skills, and values for professional staff from governmental or community-based organizations, as well as educational materials for parents, youth, caregivers, and other service providers and or community-based support persons that help each of these groups understand and participate in the public child welfare and behavioral health systems as related to children in care, basics of case management, and principles of mentalbehavioral health treatment.
b. As applicable, the plan will include recommendations for conjoint audiences, training sequencing, training standardization, and modalities for training delivery.
2. Establish guidelines for collaboration and communication between the Pathways Workgroup and the Community Team for development of the shared training plan.
3. Establish and execute a vetting process for the development of documents that explain and constitute the shared training plan. The vetting process will include identification of stakeholder groups whose comments will be solicited, and provide suggested options by which the members of the stakeholder groups may provide commentary (such as emails, focus groups, on-line surveys, etc.).
4. Develop learning objectives for each of the foundational topic areas.
4
5. Identify existing, available training materials that cover topic areas in the shared training plan, and promote the sharing of information about such training resources on the websites of the entities represented in the Pathways Workgroup and the Community Team and other proactive methods.
6. Promote the extension of linkages across the websites of the collaborating entities in the Pathways Workgroup, Community Team, and other partners for access to training resources and related information, such as announcements for training events and sources for technical assistance.
7. Identify gaps in the coverage of foundational topics specified in the shared training plan and advocate for resources for the development of training products to fill those gaps.
8. Revise the shared training plan to reflect new training needs. 9. As applicable, issue recommendations to CDSS, DHCS, CWDA, CBHDA, CIBHS, CalSWEC,
or other partners regarding goals 1-8.
Ongoing Communications Among Coordinating Organizations
The Community Team (and/or their designated workgroup) and the Pathways Workgroup each
host in-person meetings or web conferences, respectively, on a regular basis. It is expected that
the shared training plan will be a focus of attention for each of these groups during their
regular convenings. The Community Team and the Pathways Workgroups will each provide one
or more liaisons to the other group to communicate updates, commentaries, and other
advisements as needed for the development of the shared training plan via in-person or
conference call briefings, or by email correspondence. Communications from DHCS and CDSS
to the Community Team and the Pathways Workgroup can be provided by the DHCS and CDSS
members in these groups.
Addenda:
(Addendum A) Vetting Process
A basic outline of the vetting process follows; further details remain to be articulated. It is
envisioned that the vetting of the shared training plan and supporting documents would occur
at the same time, while the vetting of learning objectives for foundational topics would follow
after a longer period of development.
The Community Team and Pathways Workgroup will determine when drafts of the
shared training plan, learning objectives for foundational topics, and related supporting
documents are ready for vetting by partnering agencies and groups, and the timelines
involved for the steps of the vetting process and for product finalization.
5
The Community Team and Pathways Workgroup will identify stakeholders, content
experts, and designated staff from the child welfare and behavioral health training
systems from among their respective memberships or from external groups who have
interest in reviewing drafts and providing structured feedback to assist in the
development of the shared training plan, learning objectives, and related documents.
Drafts of the shared training plan, learning objectives, and supporting documents will be
made available online to vetting audiences for their review.
Feedback from the vetting groups may occur through a variety of structured modalities
agreed upon by the Community Team and Pathways Workgroup, such as webinars,
focus groups, and online surveys, which are considered most conducive for engaging
particular targeted audiences.
Explanations about the expectations for participating in the vetting process will be
communicated to interested parties in the identified vetting groups.
Comments from the vetting groups will be synthesized and serve as the basis for
modifying the draft plan and related documents.
The Community Team and Pathways Workgroup will determine when the shared
training plan and related documents are ready for finalization and dissemination.
(Addendum B) Products Related to the Shared Training Plan:
Preliminary List of Foundational Topics
Explanations of the Shared Training Plan for professional and lay audiences
Learning Objectives
Inventory of existing, available resources that support the shared training plan
“Clearinghouse” websites with resources for the shared training plan, information
regarding sources of technical assistance, announcements for training events, and links
to partnering agencies.
(Addendum C) Preliminary topic list:
This preliminary, suggested list of topics is drawn from the October 2015 Meeting Summary of
the Community Team and from feedback received by the Pathways Workgroup from an online
survey of attendees of the Final Statewide Leadership Team Convening in August 2015. It
should be noted that the survey inquired about general training needs at the county and
regional levels and was not specific to foundational, conjoint training. Topics recommended by
survey respondents are tagged with an asterisk.
Child Welfare 101
Title IV-E
MentalBehavioral Health 101
6
Mental Health Services Act
MentalBehavioral Health Systems of Care / Continuum of Care
Trauma-informed Practice and Implementation Tools (including screening &
assessment)*
Early Periodic Screening Diagnosis and Treatment
Psychotropic Medications
Intensive Care Coordination and IHBS
How to increase utilization of IHBS*
Medi-Cal Eligibility, Claiming, Billing Practices*, and Collaborative Documentation
Consent, Data Sharing, and HIPAA
Collaboration*
Youth Engagement*
Child and Family Teaming and Team Meetings (referrals; facilitation; adversarial
relationshipsshared power)*
Fiscal Models and Funding Sources
Outcomes*
Philanthropy & Philanthropic Organizations
Potential Audiences for Conjoint Trainings:
This list was created by the Community Team at its October 2015 meeting.
Behavioral Health Clinicians (in the public and private sectors)
Child Protective Services Social Workers (in the public and private sectors)
Parent Partners
Resource Parents
Biological Caregivers
Kin Caregivers
Youth / Transitional Age Youth (TAY)
Foster Family Agencies
Family Preservation Providers
Short-term Residential Treatment Centers (STRTCs)
DHCS/CDSS staff
County MentalBehavioral Health and Child Welfare associations
Court Partners
Judges and Attorneys
Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA)
Probation Staff
7
Law Enforcement
Faith-based Leaders
Educational Liaisons/Special Education Local Plan Areas (SELPAs)/Teachers
Regional Center Services
Managed Care Plans
MentalBehavioral Health Plans
Prescribers (Physicians)
Foundations & Philanthropies
Fiscal Counterparts
Community Resources
Mentors
Children’s Informal Supports
Fall 2014
Providing Whole-Person Care to Medicaid High-Utilizers in California: Opportunities
for County-Based Pilots in California’s 1115 Medicaid Waiver Renewal
A New Opportunity for California
The recent expansion of health care coverage to low-income Californians through the Affordable Care Act has
provided unprecedented opportunities both for access to coverage and for enhanced collaboration among
providers of historically siloed services to Medi-Cal eligible clients. At the same time, many California counties
are taking on increased responsibilities for the provision of services that touch many of our most vulnerable
Medi-Cal eligible residents, including those needing behavioral health, social services supports, and those
involved with the criminal justice system. Within this context, there is a new opportunity to advance local
efforts to improve the health outcomes of some of our most vulnerable populations, to use resources more
effectively through a coordinated and more holistic approach across sectors, and to better aligns services for
low-income populations.
Meaningful local collaboration is already happening today. For example, efforts are now underway to
coordinate the delivery of mental health and substance use benefits between Medi-Cal Plans, Specialty Mental
Health Plans, and county systems. Other local efforts are focused on enrolling vulnerable populations, such as
individuals who are being released from county jails, into Medi-Cal coverage and linking them to a health home.
To develop systematic approaches that link service delivery across separate systems of care, focus systems on
improving health outcomes while using resources more effectively, and take current local efforts to scale, a
programmatic and financing structure for Whole-Person Care is needed. The absence of a systematic Whole-
Person Care approach today results in poorer health outcomes for many low-income residents, continued
utilization of high-cost services (e.g. emergency room, hospitalization, and incarceration), and a less efficient use
of Medicaid funds and other critical resources. With the upcoming renewal of California’s 1115 Medicaid
waiver, California can build upon and expand current county efforts to test a systematic framework for
Whole-Person Care and align payment incentives to ensure effectively coordinated care across multiple local
agencies for the highest need patients.
Fall 2014
Whole Person Care Working Definition
The coordination of health, behavioral health and social services in a patient-centered manner with the goals of
improved health and well-being for individual and family outcomes and more efficient and effective use of
resources.
Vision and Framework
Our vision is for counties and local agencies to provide Whole-Person Care as described in the definition for the
highest need patients – their “high users of multiple systems” that have historically been served by county
systems – through collaborative leadership and systematic coordination with other public and private entities
identified by the county. County agencies will identify these clients with shared data, coordinate their care in
real time, and evaluate individual and population progress. Clients will have an individualized care plan and a
single accountable, trusted care manager that supports them getting them needed services. Financial flexibility
will permit providers across partnering sectors to do what is right for the client and will align incentives for
providers to collaborate. These components describe a framework for providing Whole-Person Care.
Whole-Person Care County Pilots in California’s 1115 Medicaid Waiver Renewal
As a centerpiece of California’s 1115 Medicaid waiver renewal demonstrating payment reform and delivery
system transformation, California should propose authority for development of County Whole-Person Care
Pilots that incorporate the Whole-Person Care framework described above. These pilots would test innovative
care coordination and collaboration strategies for the targeted Medi-Cal populations, and would allow
participating counties additional flexibility in how they allocate resources to best address the issues contributing
to the target population’s health conditions and current utilization of services across sectors. A key component
envisioned to be authorized through the waiver is the ability to use waiver funds for services not traditionally
covered in the Medicaid program, such as targeted housing assistance. While counties would have flexibility to
test approaches for identifying the target population and range of services and supports provided, all
participating counties would be measured against a uniform set of identified outcomes focused on overall
improvements in health, well-being, and efficiency.
Donna DeRoo, MPA, ABD
[email protected] (559) 228-2160
“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than trying to solve them.” – Henry Ford
2
• December 2012 - Pilot Performance Management Project with Fresno County (NACCHO)
• June 2013 – CDPH funding to Expand to Madera and Merced Counties
• January 2014 – CDPH to expand to San Joaquin and Tulare Counties
• June 2015 – CDPH Develop and conduct Intermediate Quality Improvement with CDPH Teams
• November 2015 – NACCHO funding to expand to Stanislaus County
• January 2016 to 2019 – CDPH Intermediate Quality Improvement Training and Coaching
3
Assess Investigate Inform & Educate
Community Engagement
Policies & Plans
Public Health Laws
Access to Care
Workforce QI Evidence-
Based Practices
Admin & Mgmt
Governance
1 2 6 5 4 3
7 8 12 11 10 9
Public Health Accreditation Domains
Standard 9.1 Use a Performance Management System to Monitor Achievement of Organizational Objectives
Standard 9.2 Develop and Implement Quality Improvement Processes Integrated into Organizational Practice, Programs, Processes, and Interventions
Lead IQI project facilitation
Provide consultation to CDPH leadership and staff
Develop intermediate IQI curriculum
Conduct IQI training with five teams
Develop an IQI coaching plan
Conduct IQI coaching
Created the IQI Guidebook for California
4
5
Session 0: QI Introduction Review Session 1: QI Project Initiation Session 2: Current State Assessment Session 3: Root Cause Analysis Session 4: Identify and Select QI Solutions Session 5: Pilot Select QI Solutions Session 6: Analyze and Evaluate Pilot Results Session 7: Adapt, Adopt or Abandon Decision and Hold the QI Gains Session 8: Capstone and Storyboard Presentation
All about problem solving Removes system inefficiencies Increases our effectiveness Hold ourselves accountable Supports performance-based decision
making processes Empowers employees to be agents of
change Decreases frustrations Energizes our work Boosts employee satisfaction
6
Culture
of
Quality
Employee
Empowerment
Teamwork &
Collaboration
Leadership
Commitment
Customer
Focus
QI
Infrastructure
Continual
Process
Improvement
7
Extra work
Evaluating processes
Looking for “bad apples”
Process and behavior changes do not
hold
8
Empowers staff to make great strides
towards quality
Energize our work
Removes inefficiencies, improves the
process, decreases frustrations
Boosts employee satisfaction
9
Quality Control
•Set of activities for
ensuring quality in
products. The
activities focus on
identifying
defects in the
actual products
produced.
Quality
Assurance
•Set of activities
for ensuring
quality in the
processes by
which products
are developed.
Quality
Improvement
•Focused on
improving an
existing
process, service,
or outcomes.
10
Source: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Quality_Assurance_vs_Quality_Control
Introduction to QI for…
◦ Leadership
◦ Supervisors & Managers
◦ Staff
Implement QI “Immediately”
QI projects may vary depending upon the level of QI
experience
◦ Beginner QI projects: 1st year with QI
◦ Intermediate QI projects: 2nd
Year with QI
◦ Advanced QI projects: 3rd
Year with QI
11
Leading to Intermediate and Advanced QI Training
EVERYONE
D
Large teams
◦ Greater difficulty coordinating schedules for meetings
◦ Tend to involve lengthy discussions with little consensus
◦ Project moves much slower and may stall out
Small teams ◦ May miss representation from
key groups ◦ Limits insight into what is
really happening with the process and the underlying root causes
◦ Can feel overwhelmed by having to accomplish so many tasks with little resource support
◦ Small team projects tend to have a lot of “do overs” due to missing information
12
Optimal size is 6 -12 members
13
Team Sponsor
• Authority in the organization to implement suggested changes, overcome barriers, and allocate resources
• Understands the implications of the proposed change on the various parts of the system
Project Lead
• Driver of the project
• Schedules and facilitates QI meetings
• Understands the details of the process the team is trying to improve
• Actively participates contributing ideas and participating in the team processes and decisions.
• Holds team members accountable to fulfill their roles and responsibilities
• Prepares summary updates for Sponsor
Team Members
• Select cross functional and technical experts that are involved with the process day-in day-out
• Where the selected process impacts different departments the project should have representation from those departments
• Accountable to complete their action items on time
• Show up and participate for all QI team meetings
Team Roles & Responsibilities
14
High Performance
Team The Leader
The Team Player
The Researcher
The Expert
The Planner
The Creative
The Communicator
15
16
17
PLAN
DO CHECK
ACT
• Identify an Opportunity and Plan for Improvement
• Test the Theory for Improvement
• Standardize the Improvement and Establish Future Plans
• Use Data to Check Results of the test
50%
20% 20%
10%
18
19
Leadership
QI Champions
• Consistently models PM & QI behaviors • Has QI team(s) present their findings during all-hands meetings • QI & PM are constant agenda items
Leadership
• Early adopters tend to be your QI champions – leverage their enthusiasm and desire to continuously improve
• Support QI teams with the time and space to create significant improvements
• Staff are actively involved in QI identification, prioritization, and implementation
• Support staff as they strive for continuous quality improvement
Leadership • Pace the QI projects throughout the year to prevent QI
saturation and burnout
Staff
Project
Maintaining Momentum
20
Continuous Improvement
Learn
ing
D
21
22
Program created in 2004: CVHPI’s mission to create capacity to address
inequities in health in the San Joaquin Valley
Cohort 1 in 2005; Cohort 11 completes in May
Year-long program 7 day-long seminars; team project; individual
support; networking with >250 other graduates
Designed for emerging leaders, Graduates have advanced to key leadership roles in
population health advocacy, policy and programming throughout the region and state.
23
We seek to support the development of population health leaders for the San Joaquin Valley.
We help leaders use advanced health policy analysis, development, and implementation tools to advance health equity in the San Joaquin Valley.
Practice skills in examining how national, state and local population health and health care policies create and to health and health care challenges in the Central San Joaquin Valley
Practice skills in building and supporting community-led initiatives, using the social and environmental determinants of health inequities frame, to improve population health in the region.
Sharpen capacity to use state-of-the-art analytic tools to: Explain health and health care inequities; Assess public health and health care initiative; Facilitate multi-sectoral engagement in health improvement Implement and evaluate policy and program change.
Explore new models of community benefit leadership that
emphasize resource mobilization, values alignment, and collaborative problem solving
Cohorts 1 through 9 Session 1 – Introductions, Leadership Model and Health Policy
101 Session 2 – Multicultural Issues in Health Policy and
Leadership Session 3 – Health Needs Assessment and Policy Analysis,
Strategic Planning and Resource Mobilization, Group Project Identification
Session 4 Emerging Issues in Health Policy Analysis and Program evaluation, Group Project Design
Session 5 – Health Care Access: Financing, Provider Shortages Implications on the Public Health System
Session 6 – Population Groups and Health Policy: Children, Eldercare and People with Disabilities and Behavioral Health
Session 7 – Alternative Goals for Health Policy, Assessing Public Views on Health and Health Care, Values Alignment and Program Implementation
Session 8 – Integrated Health Systems: Financing/Delivery Integration, Health Care and Social Service Integration
Session 9 – Project Presentations and Graduation
26
Cohorts 10 and 11 have been specially designed to support Health Equity Cohort members: San Joaquin Valley Public Health Consortium member staff assigned to lead equity initiatives.
Session 1 – Health & Health Disparity: Policy Implication
Session 2 – Multicultural & Race
Session 3 – Needs Assessment, Strategic Planning & Framework
Session 4 Public Health Financing- Implications on the Public Health System
Session 5 – Chronic Disease, Equity and the Role of Public Health
Session 6 –Preterm Birth & Children’s Health
Session 7 – Equity Initiatives - STD’s and HIV and Public Health
Session 8 – Goals for Health Policy: Philosophical & Political Science Perspectives
Session 9 – Project Presentation, Graduation
“HPLP has not only helped staff build skills and acquire new contacts, it has
also improved the professional capacity for the Department as a whole.”
Kathleen Grassi Director Merced County Department of Public Health
Van Do-Reynoso Director of Public Health Madera County Public Health Department
Quote
David Luchini Assistant Director Fresno County Department of Public Health
Quote
31
PH
ASE
ST
EPS
DEL
IVER
AB
LES
KEY
TA
SKS
TOO
LS
PDCA ROADMAP PLAN DO CHECK ACT
Solutions Generate & Select
Solutions
Assess Assess Situation
or Process
Identify Identify Root
Causes
Select Select Improvement
Opportunity
Implement Implement Trial/Pilot
Run of Solution
Analyze Analyze Trial
Run Results
Draw Draw
Conclusions
Adopt,
Adapt,
Abandon
Monitor Hold the
Gains
Identify all possible causes impacting the current process
Identify all issues, bottlenecks and redundant loops
Drill down into each identified cause and determine the root cause
Identify root causes within your control and out of your control
Evaluate & prioritize identified root causes
Select the root cause(s) that will form the QI project
Confirm baseline data validates selected root cause(s)
QI Project Prioritization Matrix
QI Charter Document
QI Aim Statement
SMART Objective Worksheet
Identify QI project opportunity
Populate the QI Project Charter
Develop the problem statement
Select team members
Develop QI aim statement
Determine scope
Identify the target QI audience
Develop SMART objectives
Document potential constraints and risks
Establish PDCA milestone dates
Develop communication plan for stakeholders
Map out the current process or situation
Identify areas for improvement
Identify any performance gaps
Evaluate baseline data describing the current state
If no baseline exists, execute data collection plan to build baseline
Confirm baseline data supports quality problem statement
Begin to populate Storyboard
Multivoting Tool
Tree Diagram
Generate list of all potential solutions and improvements that address the selected root cause(s)
Evaluate and prioritize potential solutions
Review best practices to identify potential improvements
Select the QI solution(s) that will accomplish our QI aim statement
Define the steps required to implement the selected solution
QI Implementation Summary
QI Action Plan
QI Gantt Chart
Check Sheets
Flowcharts
Storyboard
Compare pilot results to QI aim statement baseline data
Compare pilot results to SMART objectives baseline data
Pie Charts
Pareto Charts
Radar Charts
Histograms
Run Charts
Check Sheets
Storyboard
Did we achieve the
measure of success
stated in QI charter
aim statement?
Did we achieve our
stated SMART
objectives?
Did we eliminate a
root cause(s)?
Did we encounter
unintended benefits?
Did we encounter
unexpected
obstacles?
Is our solution
scalable?
Can we roll it out to a
broader audience?
Do we need to make
any adjustments?
QI Implementation
Summary
Storyboard
Determine if QI project results are to be Adopted, Adapted, or Abandoned per the PDCA model
If Adopt, begin preparations for a broader scale rollout
If Adapt, begin preparation for another DO cycle to test a modification to the process
If Abandon, go back to the PLAN stage to review initial QI aim, SMART objectives, processes and root cause assumptions
CELEBRATE
QI Implementation Summary
Storyboard
Communication Plan
Run Charts
Check Sheets
Histograms
Pareto Charts
Quality Perf System
Take steps to preserve your gains and sustain your accomplishments
Anchor the process gains into your quality performance system, internal dashboard, or alternative reporting mechanism
Communicate pilot outcomes to key internal and external customers
Flowchart
Cross Functional Process Map
Value Stream Map
Affinity Diagram
Check Sheets
Storyboard
Affinity Diagram
Cause & Effect Diagram
5 Whys
Root Cause Analysis Table
Multivoting Tool
Storyboard
Project coordinated by Central California Center for Health and Human Services, California State University, Fresno
Preparation
Populate the QI Pilot Implementation Summary
Set the pilot date
Finalize SMART objectives
Update data baseline for pilot
Develop action plans for pilot obstacles and risks
Develop pilot communication plan
Deliver additional training for pilot
Build the QI action plan
Implementation
Conduct pilot on a small scale
Communicate to key stakeholders during pilot
Collect, chart, and display data to monitor pilot effectiveness
Document benefits, problems,
unexpected observations, and
unintended side effects
QI Implementation Summary
QI Action Plan
Communication Plan
Update Baseline Data
Update SMART Objectives
Update Storyboard
Pilot Data Results
Update QI Implementation Summary
Update Storyboard
Update the QI Implementation Summary
Update Storyboard
Update the QI Implementation Summary
Update Storyboard
Finalized Storyboard
Updated Communication Plan
QI Charter Document Update QI Charter
Update Baseline Data
Update Storyboard
Root Cause Analysis
Update QI Charter
Update Baseline Data
Update Storyboard
Current Process Map
Baseline Data
Update QI Charter
Begin Storyboard
RFA Update:
http://calswec.berkeley.edu/resource-family-approval-rfa-training-being-piloted
For those individuals who have been identified as a County Field Advisor for the
Common Core 3.0, please join us in our 3 day training.
o Training Day 1: Field Advisor Training.
o Training Day 2 & 3: Building Coaching Capacity for Field Advisors
As a Field Advisor, you are required to attend all 3 training days.
Please register using the link(s) provided below.
Please note you must complete the required Field Advisor eLearning module prior to
attendance. You will be provided access to the eLearning module and receive an email
with further instructions on how to access the eLearning module upon your
registration for the 3-day Field Advisor Training.
Central Region Field Advisor
And Coaching Training Hosted by Central California Training Academy
Field Advisor Training:
Monday, March 7, 2016
9:00 AM – 4:00 PM
Building Coaching Capacity for Field Advisors:
Tuesday & Wednesday, March 8-9, 2016
9:00 AM – 4:00 PM Both Days
Fresno Pacific University – Merced Campus
3379 G Street, Bldg. P, Room #104, Merced
For Further Information Contact your Regional Training Coordinator:
Mayko Vang – [email protected] Phone # 209-261-5401
Cindy Friesen – [email protected] Phone # 559-284-8630
Register online through Eventbrite at: http://field-advisor-and-coaching-training-march-7-8-9.eventbrite.com/
Registration Deadline: March 1, 2016
Intended Audience: Selected Case Review staff across California
What you’ll learn: This workshop will review the new Federal Case Review tool, which is used to: 1) ensure child welfare conformity with federal requirements; 2) determine what is actually happening to children and families engaged in child welfare services; and 3) assist the state and county to enhance capacity to help children and families achieve positive outcomes. This intensive, four-day workshop will prepare staff with the materials needed to successfully conduct the California Child and Family Review (C-CFSR) process.
How you’ll benefit:
Understand the purpose and role of the case reviewer and case review tools
Demonstrate the skills required to complete the case review tool accurately
Synthesize information from a variety of sources (organizing data in such a way that they can use the information in the tool)
Apply the organizational skills necessary for completion of the case review tool
Follow-Up Coaching Sessions: Trainees are required to participate in three of the following coaching call dates. Please click on link to register for that date:
Tuesday, March 29 from 10:00 – Noon https://federal-case-review-training-3-29-2016.eventbrite.com/
Thursday, April 12 from 10:00 – Noon https://federal-case-review-training-4-12-2016.eventbrite.com/
Tuesday, April 26 from 10:00 – Noon https://federal-case-review-training-4-26-2016.eventbrite.com/
Tuesday, May 10 from 10:00 – Noon https://federal-case-review-training-5-10-2016.eventbrite.com/
Trainers: David Plassman, M.Div; Kate Acosta, MA & Judy Rutan, MPA
No charge for trainings. All trainings are provided to help meet
the Federal Review and AB638 Outcomes of Safety, Permanence
and Well Being.
DATES:
March 15-18, 2016
TIME:
8:30am – 5:00pm
LOCATION:
Fresno Pacific
University Merced
Campus
3379 G. Street, Bldg. P
Room # 104, Merced
REGISTRATION
DEADLINE:
March 1, 2016
Please register online at: https://federal-case-review-
training-march-15-thru-
18.eventbrite.com/
For questions re: training
contact Judy Rutan at
559-731-2613
The Central California Training Academy presents
FEDERAL CASE REVIEW TRAINING A four-day intensive overview to support the Case Review Certification Process in California
Central California Training Academy
WORKSHOP ANNOUNCEMENT
Advanced Analytics for Child
Welfare
This session is intended to focus on how child welfare
staff might most effectively combine the data resources
they have, and the mandates under which they are
operating to develop an information management and
operations strategy that will allow them to focus on the
critical issues in their county child welfare system. In
particular, leaders are interested in understanding how to
make best of use of their information resources to
structure services that both meet their needs, and that are
consistent with their county’s Self Assessment and SIP
(system improvement plans).
Topics include
Thinking Systematically about Child Welfare:
From Investigations to Permanency
Effective Communication of Child Welfare
Outcomes
Developing Baseline Expectations for
Innovation
Informing Continuous Quality Improvement
Evaluating Contract Agency Performance
Using Longitudinal Information in the Budget
Process
We strongly encourage counties to bring a team
comprised of leadership, case reviewers,
analysts, quality assurance and / or
administrative staff, and other child welfare staff
who are responsible for monitoring and
improving outcomes for child welfare.
Professional Credit
BBS: Course meets the qualifications for 18 hours of
continuing education credit for MFT’s and/or LCSW’s as
required by The California Board of Behavioral
Sciences. Our provider number is: PCE 577.
BRN: Provider approved by the California Board of
Registered Nursing. Provider number is BRN00046 for
18 contact hours.
Instructors
Jennifer Haight is a Senior Researcher at Chapin Hall at
the University of Chicago, and a senior staff member of
the Center for State Child Welfare Data. She has worked
extensively with staff from public and private child
welfare agencies to help them use their administrative
data more effectively to understand the functioning of
their child welfare systems and to facilitate continuous
program improvements. A particular focus has been
incorporating information about abuse and neglect
incidents into analyses of child welfare outcomes. More
recently, her work has focused on assisting public child
welfare agencies in the development and implementation
of performance-based contracting initiatives. Jennifer
holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Grinnell College
and a Master of Arts degree from the State University of
New York at Binghamton.
Daniel Webster, M.S.W., Ph.D., is a senior research
specialist and project director at the Center for Social
Services Research at the University of California,
Berkeley. A consultant for the Annie E. Casey
Foundation for the past eight years, he has worked with
county and state child welfare staff in California,
Oregon, Washington and Alaska. Webster’s major fields
of interest include child welfare services, the mental
health needs of children in out-of-home care and poverty.
Date and time
March 22-24, 2016
9:00 am – 4:00 pm
Location
Ventura County Children & Family Services
Telephone Road Building, 2nd
Floor
4651 Telephone Road, Ventura, CA 93003
To Register online please use the following link:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/advanced-analytics-for-
child-welfare-tickets-20901066653
For more information
Contact Judy Rutan at (559) 731-2613
Scope of Work
Date :
Dear, John B. Cullen
Term:
Deliverables:
Bay Area Social Service Consortium (BASSC) Directors and Bay Area Training Academy (BAA) leadership are expressing the
imperative to improve focus on the provision of ongoing skill development for our county social services workforce. Several critical
issues have been identified regarding capacity building for BAA, including; structure, responsibility for new training, needed subject
matter, delivery methods, collaboration and coordination linkages, funding and cost sharing. In addition, there is consensus that a
broader scope of in-service trainings are needed but not well planned, developed or delivered in the Bay Area and, like the rest of
California, the training that is provided to our workforce varies greatly by county. BASSC County Directors acknowledged that
current and future law and regulatory changes, community service delivery expectations, staff retention, and funding challenges, all
demand an efficient, effective and equitable In-Service Training Structure in the Bay Area. The BAA offered that it must make changes
to its structure, operations, and financing, in order to have the necessary capacity to plan, develop and deliver a broader range of in-
service training offerings to member counties.
The County Directors within BASSC supported moving forward on a work plan to identify what is needed to improve the capacity of
the BAA to provide a broad range of In-Service Training for county staff. Specifically County Directors asked that the initial scope of
work focus on capacity building in the Child Welfare and Adult Service program areas, describing a model structure that would
ultimately support a broader scope of in-services training requests beyond Child and Adult Services.
Prepare a report for BAA and BASSC review and discussion with recommendations for a model In-service training structure,
operational components, and
financial parameters necessary for BAA to address current and future Child Welfare and APS training needs. The model will also
address the larger goal of identifying what steps could be taken to improve the overall structure and training delivery system so that
county in-service training requests beyond Child and Adult Services can be routinely met.
Phase One of this agreement will begin 1/1/16 – 3/30/16. Hours not to exceed 95 hours within this agreement time period.*
Services and deliverables expected in this agreement include:
• Conducting initial assessments through interviews with key county, state, regional training consortia, university, and other training
related partners.
• Review of training, policies, procedures and fiscal information with key informants
• A status report to the Bay Area County directors and BAA leadership at the April 7-8, 2016 BASSC meeting
Deliverbles Cont:
Phase Two of this agreement will begin from 4/1/16 - 6/30/16. Hours not to exceed 90 within this time period.*
Services and deliverables expected in this agreement include:
• Continue assessment interview, review of policies/regulations/fiscal information.
• Prepare report for BAA and BASSC review and discussion with recommendations for a model In-service Training structure,
operational components, and
financial parameters necessary for BAA to address Child Welfare and APS training needs.
• Present final report for review and comment at the June 2-3 BASSC meeting.
• Finalize report for dissemination by 6/30/16.
* Hours may vary month to month based on project needs.
Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma,
The Central California Training Academy would like to confirm your services for the following county(ies):
Max # of hours:
Introduction and Summary:
Hourly Rate: 2/1/16 - 6/30/16
The total fee for this agreement is:
Purpose:
January 16, 2016
Trainer Name:
Trainer Address:
Trainer Phone:
Trainer E-Mail:
John B. Cullen
11/14/13
Phase One of this agreement will begin 1/1/16 – 3/30/16. Hours not to exceed 95 hours within this agreement time period.*
Services and deliverables expected in this agreement include:
• Conducting initial assessments through interviews with key county, state, regional training consortia, university, and other training
related partners.
• Review of training, policies, procedures and fiscal information with key informants
• A status report to the Bay Area County directors and BAA leadership at the April 7-8, 2016 BASSC meeting
Deliverbles Cont:
Phase Two of this agreement will begin from 4/1/16 - 6/30/16. Hours not to exceed 90 within this time period.*
Services and deliverables expected in this agreement include:
• Continue assessment interview, review of policies/regulations/fiscal information.
• Prepare report for BAA and BASSC review and discussion with recommendations for a model In-service Training structure,
operational components, and
financial parameters necessary for BAA to address Child Welfare and APS training needs.
• Present final report for review and comment at the June 2-3 BASSC meeting.
• Finalize report for dissemination by 6/30/16.
* Hours may vary month to month based on project needs.
Fiscal Items:
Thank you!
Sincerely,
559-228-4055
[email protected] by e-mail at:
hesitate to contact me by phone at:
If you are in need of recommendations for lodging or if you have any other questions please do not
Due to Fresno State Foundation accounting policies, failure to receive this paperwork 30 days prior to training/coaching, may result
in cancellation of the training/coaching. Please take care to ensure that all sections are completed thoroughly and properly since
errors will cause a delay in processing. If you have questions about this form, please contact Stephanie Pearl at 559.228.4010. After
completion of monthly training/coaching, please submit an invoice by the 5th of the following month for timely payment.
Invoices received after the 15th of each month will require a separate justification letter written by the trainer/coach explaining why
the invoice is late and must be submitted with the invoice
Field Based Trainers/coaches will provide written documentation, monthly, which will specify learning objective(s), of each
individual, group, supervisor and/ or management session.
In the unlikely event that a training/coaching is cancelled either by the trainer/coach or CCTA, we will make every attempt to
reschedule, however, the CCTA/Fresno State policy is that unless a training/coaching actually occurs, we are unable to pay the
trainer/coach. If for some reason you have to cancel, we ask that you give as much notice as possible and try to arrange for a
substitute trainer.
Wording Examples
20 hours are confirmed for July 1 – September 30, 2013. The deliverables for this agreement are as follows:
- Provide field based training to staff on topics related to: utilize language of county self assessment, state improvement
plan and federal outcomes. Safety, Permanency and Well-being.
- If scope includes facilitation, you need to define the facilitation: EXAMPLE: Will facilitate permanency planning meetings
with Managers to review, update and develop policies and procedures to assist Family Finding Efforts.
- Review county data and state/national statistics, as needed, to assist in the development of policy and practices to
improve Exits to Permanency outcomes.
- Participate in Case Reviews as necessary to provide the above services.
* Hours may vary month to month based on county needs.
This agreement will begin September 15 – December 31, 2013. Hours not to exceed 30 hours with in this agreement time
period.
• Services and deliverables expected in this agreement include:
• conducting initial assessments through interviews with county constituents to plan for further assessment and identify
necessary training.
• Review of policies, procedures, and forms as well as observation of TDM and debrief.
• A status report is due to Training Specialist on June 30, 2013 to receive payment.
* Hours may vary month to month based on county needs.
* As much As possible, include dates for completion, meetings, trainings, observations. This will help with invoicing As well.
* Always feel free to contact me (Jennifer) for brainstorming language.
Wording Examples
* As much As possible, include dates for completion, meetings, trainings, observations. This will help with invoicing As well.
* Always feel free to contact me (Jennifer) for brainstorming language.
Wording Examples
Purpose: Field Based Training is to increase safety, well being and permanence of families.
Field based trainers can work with individuals, groups, supervisors and/or management in identifying goals,
facilitating/and or modeling group process, training staff in creating safety plans, using SOP tools (ie. safety mapping, three
questions, solution focused/scaling questions, three houses, safety house, reflective listening) clarifying goals, and
measuring outcomes. Field based Trainers will continually integrate cultural humility, trauma informed practice, and
family engagement into each training session. Field Based Trainers will provide written documentation, monthly, which
will specify learning objective(s), of each individual, group, supervisor and/ or management session.
Wording Examples