Albemarle CPMT Charlottesville CPMT Joint Committee Retreat Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 16, 2018 Water Street Center 407 E. Water Street Present: Diane Kuknyo, Cheryl Lewis, Hope Robinson, Martha Carroll, Erin Callas, Lori Allshouse, Kevin Kirst, Katie Ralston, Phyllis Savides, Kaki Dimock, Lisa Beitz, Jennifer Wells Absent: Mike Murphy and Kendra King Guest: Tim Breedlove Quorum Present: Albemarle: Yes Charlottesville: Yes The retreat began at 12:30 with lunch and an icebreaker. Introductions were made and CPMT welcomed Lori Allshouse, who will be replacing Bill Letteri as the Albemarle County representative. Agenda Item: Action: Approval of FY19 Provider Agreement Documents Presenter: CSA Coordinators Discussion/Summary: Tim Breedlove brought the recommendations of the Program Sub-Committee regarding the Multicultural expectations back to CPMT and explained the reasoning behind why Program believed it was important to highlight these expectations as a standalone document. Kevin expressed concerns that if it were made a part of the contract, then there may be some vendors who would not feel comfortable completing the agreement due to not being able to meet the expectations. Tim explained that it is what we strive for and what we should want the vendors to strive for as well. Kaki agreed that it was important enough to incorporate into the Community Practice Model and should be included as an additional handout with the FY19 CSA Provider Agreements. Phyllis agreed that it could be looked at for next year’s agreement but for this year it could be sent as a separate attachment. Documents/Resources: Sent via email Next Steps/Action(s) Taken: Phyllis Savides made motion for Albemarle to approve the FY19 Licensed and Non-licensed Provider Agreements; which was seconded by Erin Callas. Diane Kuknyo made motion for Charlottesville to approve the FY19 Licensed and Non-licensed Provider Agreements; which was seconded by Martha Carroll. Both motions passed unanimously. Agenda Item: Review Work Plan Presenter: Phyllis Savides Discussion/Summary: CPMT reviewed the work plan and made updates to items that can come off as the objectives have been achieved. Goal one can be removed, except for 1.2 with regards to CPMT reviewing the Community Practice Model and determining how to incorporate the Multi-cultural expectations into the existing document. Goal two will be reviewed during the data discussion. Goal three will need to be reviewed by CPMT to decide what other communications may be needed. Both County and City DSS have presented to their local governing bodies. Should this be done more than once? All objectives relating to crisis stabilization can come off as the data collection and reporting out to CPMT has already happened. Documents/Resources: sent via email Next Steps/Action(s) taken: Document will be updated Agenda Item: Data and Outcomes Discussion Presenter: Kaki Dimock Discussion/Summary: Kaki reviewed the data dashboard to see which items were irrelevant and which should stay. Kevin explained that simply having the numbers of SPED students is irrelevant unless you consider it in comparison to how many children were kept out of private day, which changes the picture. Lori recommended an environmental scan, which provides a view of the landscape and then looking at those items that are actionable. Each serves a purpose. Phyllis pointed out the importance of reviewing the Prevention services, not just in DSS but with partner agencies as well, that have kept children from entering foster care. If there is a way to see the cost of prevention services versus the savings of not entering foster care, it would show a clearer picture. Diane shared the disproportionality study with CPMT. UVA has a public interest data lab that allows a professor and 4th and 5th year students who apply to work on a project at no cost to the agency. City DSS was selected. After working through MOUs with various entities such as VDSS, the students were allowed to receive a “data dump” of 3 years’ worth of data (7/1/14-6/30/17). They were looking specifically at racial disparity within certain parameters. They reviewed disparity at the referral (main reporters were public schools, police, and medical), at the validation (whose was screened out vs. family assessments vs. investigations), and at foster care (placement type, worker visits, family visits, exit from foster care). Diane pointed out the value in having an external entity review the data with experience in analyzing data is expected to be immensely helpful. She pointed out the race of children in poverty as a factor. The idea is to try and identify implicit bias among those who interact within these systems. She received the preliminary report yesterday, but has not had time to review it and expects to have a final report at the end of June or possibly in July. She will use the information shared as an opportunity for staff development and to see what other ideas may come from the report. She will continue to share information with CPMT. Kaki used this as a specific example of one use of data. The remainder of the data dash points were reviewed with the idea that footnotes should be used to make any needed clarifications. Kaki recommended adding trends, possibly 5 year trends. CPMT will need to drill down which CANS domains should be tracked in CANVaS, now that the new version allows for the locality to look more closely. Documents/Resources: none Next Steps/Action(s) taken: Information and available reports in CANVaS will be shared with CPMT (data workgroup??) Agenda Item: Utilization Management (to include Program) Presenter: Phyllis Savides Discussion/Summary: Phyllis reviewed a Power Point presentation that included the Code and the local policy with regards to utilization management. She also reviewed Program’s charge. She pointed out that Program originally had responsibilities for FAPT, which is no longer the case. One of the slides was a UM cycle. Kevin pointed out that he thought that the right side of the cycle rested with CPMT (looking at data and trends) and that the left side of it rested with Program (developing suggestions for services or policy changes). The idea of having CPMT decide which items are worth a “deeper dive” will go to Program to look into whether there is a need or a service need. Once Program does this, it will come back to CPMT. Tim, as the current chair, was asked to share his thoughts on Program. He pointed out that Program has highs and lows. The highs tend to be more when there are tasks and the lows are during times of lack of clarity and when Program feels like they have put in a lot of work with little results. He offered some recommendations to include better communication, reduce the number of times Program meets to every other month with a focused agenda, CPMT communicating to Program what they are expecting. He noted that the large service gaps need to be broken down and that workgroups may be helpful to use in between meetings or as needed. Katie advised Program needs more structure and Program sees its responsibility as the service gaps and working to address them. However the gaps are large, overwhelming tasks which often feel unsolvable. Kevin recommended Program meet quarterly with a focus on data review (deeper dive); service gaps and recommendations; family involvement; and family, worker, provider input. Everyone recognized the importance of having communication flow between CPMT and Program; and Program and FAPT. Phyllis suggested to maximize the use of the CSA Coordinators. There is a lack of performance outcomes for providers and families. Lori noted that Program needs to be meaningful, structured, and communicative. Program will continue to need to meet the OCS requirements for the service gap survey. However, they can decide what are manageable tasks and when they may need more help and/or guidance from CPMT. Another suggestion is that the Program chair come to the CPMT meetings, which allows for improved communication. Program should also be getting on-going feedback from the FAPT chair. Documents/Resources: Next Steps/Action(s): Add goal to work plan creating our local CSA structure and laying out Program’s role and structure. Meeting adjourned at 4:00. Next scheduled meeting: June 20, 2018, Rm. 235 Respectfully Submitted: Jennifer Wells