Albemarle CPMT Charlottesville CPMT Joint Committee Meeting Minutes Thursday January 5, 2022 Present: Ryan Davidson, Jennifer Wells, Tayler Ellis, Katie Ralston, Misty Graves, Alice Micklem, Neta Davis, Erin Callas, Mary Stebbins, Christa Galleo, Tammy Johnston, Kevin Kirst Absent: Martha Carroll, Michelle Busby, Andre Key, Asheley Marshall, Angela Bracey, Sue Moffett Quorum for Albemarle: Yes Quorum for Charlottesville: No Call to Order: Mary Stebbins, Albemarle Chair called the meeting to order at 9:05 A.M. Agenda Item: Review & Approval of the Agenda/ Acceptance of Consent Agenda including Minutes, Financial Reports including Foster Care Expense Reports & FAPT approved expenses Presenter: Chair Discussion/Summary: Mary asked for motion of approval or any questions. No questions or discussion. Next Steps/Action(s): Tammy Johnston makes motion to approve minutes and financials for the county, Erin Callas seconds, Motion passed. Quorum not met for the city, so no motion made for city approval. Presentation – OCS DATA Presenter: CSA Coordinators Discussion/Summary: Jennifer begins OCS presentation - The goal for today is to show what’s on the site and decide what to make as the focal point for CPMT, so we can track those things. We will focus on Albemarle data today but based on what CPMT wants to focus on, we can pull data from both localities. You can select what locality you want to look at and it shows the data throughout the last 5 fiscal years. Jennifer asks if there’s anything in particular CPMT wants to look at. You can go into different screens and break things down. For example, you can narrow it down by mandate type, service placement types, service names, and expenditure codes in finance and demographics. You can click on things within those screens as well to narrow the data down. For example, under mandate type, you can click on Foster Care and the other data will change to reflect just foster care cases. You can also change what fiscal year you look at, so you can look at past years that are already done or you can look at the current data for this year so far. Neta asks about race vs gender and if it is possible to look into the specifics of how that data correlates. Jennifer says we can ask if there’s a way to do so. Kevin suggests looking at your agency or locality and asking specific questions to bring to a round table discussion, so we can narrow things down further and decide what we may want to focus on or be interested in. Neta says she likes the idea of having an assignment where we can come back and discuss later. Jennifer mentions that there are different things that will be more important for each member of CPMT, so it might be good to come up with some of the things that are most important to look at as a group. Jennifer shows the Outcome Measures which can be narrowed down by CANS, Foster Care, and CSA. Misty asks what the percentages mean when looking at the CANS data. For example, what does 45.3% mean in CANS behavioral/emotional needs? Alice explains how the CANS are measured, but Tammy says it can get confusing because the scores flip depending on the question/category. There is an explanation when you hover over the data, and we concluded that the higher the number the better. Misty mentions using CANS as a tool for assessing providers. Jennifer mentions that there’s an incentive for having your CANS come out a certain way in order to get Medicaid approval. Tammy also mentions that it just depends on how the workers are perceiving the child/family/school relationships and how they are marking it on CANS. Neta asks about what the CANS school data is showing. Jennifer says she thinks it’s just behavioral but we can ask if it’s just behavioral or if its reflecting all three school domains. Erin Callas asks about the median income compared to Albemarle and Charlottesville. Charlottesville’s is significantly lower. Katie says we have to keep in mind UVA housing and students that are unemployed. Neta asks about the exit to permanency data and if there’s been a significant change in the last year. Katie says yes because there have been more adoptions, more kinship placements, etc. Jennifer shows the data for CSA which reflects that kids that are only getting community based services. Misty asks when looking at the data, what would our uses be? Neta says measuring our anti-racist goal. Misty asks what we do with the information if we see a significant change. Neta says it would help put training plans in place and be able to narrow down what could potentially be happening. Tammy asks about residential vs community-based data. Katie says the data reflects only those kids getting community- based services, so it does not reflect kids that are receiving residential services. Misty says she would like to look at number of kids in care because we ultimately want to decrease the number of kids in care. Misty would also like to look at the demographics to decrease disproportionality. Misty said we should try to look at the data annually. Katie says it’s typically looked at during the retreat so looking at it now gives time to prepare for specific things to look at during retreat. Mary asks when the 2023 FY will be complete. It wouldn’t be complete until the end of June. So, Misty says if they keep the retreat schedule the same, then they would look at 2022. Ryan says the danger is the lag year to year – it’s not always the same. Kevin gives some examples of some meta questions to look at that everyone can answer and based on those answers, we can pinpoint themes and come up with a larger focus. Misty says she likes those questions and mentions that we could change the retreat date. Ryan says from a budgetary perspective, February and/or March is too late. Next Steps/Action(s): Informational Agenda Item- FAPT Update Presenter: CSA Coordinators Discussion/Summary: No update for County FAPT. Katie says for City FAPT, they have begun to hear truancy cases brought by the schools. They have completed two cases so far and based on those cases, they need to work to develop a clearer process. City FAPT has capacity to take this on since they are staffing fewer cases and have had to cancel FAPT all together due to the limited number of cases. Next Steps/Action(s) Taken: Informational Agenda Item- CSA Coordinator Update Presenter: CSA Coordinators Discussion/Summary: Jennifer says there’s a section in the licensed provider agreement about virtual meetings with clients. Jennifer had a non-licensed provider ask if they would be allowed to have virtual meetings with clients. The issue with that is how to regulate that when they are not licensed. In this particular case, the provider was moving out of state and wanted to maintain communications with clients here. Katie asks if its more than one provider that’s asking. Alice says that would undercut the value of providing those services in person, so there should be some regulations. Jennifer says she doesn’t know how much of it is going on. She was just aware of one and one that specifically asked. Everyone agrees they aren’t sure how they would do parent mentoring virtually. Erin expressed concerns around privacy and confidentiality issues. Misty has a different perspective because they have to be more flexible, so she thinks on a case-by-case basis, a virtual meeting should be allowed. But it shouldn’t be fully virtual. Neta agrees – there is a lot of value in providing some services virtually, but there is an issue with workers and clients not wanting to leave their house. Katie says it would certainly be the exception and not the standard if that’s what’s decided on. Neta asks if there’s a way to tell if the provider is providing virtual services as the exception and not just all the time. Katie says we would have to rely on the workers for that information. Katie says in conversation with the providers, you should be able to tell if they are providing services in person or not. It depends on the goal of the service. Neta says maybe it can be a training with case workers to determine if the service should be provided in person or if it is okay to be virtual. Misty and Jennifer agree that there should be some transparency around when these meetings are done virtually and that everyone should be in agreement, including the family, case worker, etc., that the meeting is virtual. Kevin says it could be okay but the provider will have to follow the parameters we put in place and that confidentiality should be top priority and include the same wording in non licensed agreement. Misty mentions sending a reminder email to providers about CPMT stance on virtual meetings. Next Steps/Action(s) Taken: Misty will draft an email for providers to bring back at next meeting. Agenda Item- Program Sub Committee Update Presenter: Program Chair Discussion/Summary: Alice says there’s not much of an update. They are going to try and see if texting links to clients will provide more responses to the provider satisfaction survey since the results are so low. Next Steps/Action(s) Taken: informational Agenda Item: OCS Communications Presenter: All Discussion/Summary: None Next Steps/Action(s) Taken: Agenda Item: Discussion and Engagement- SPED transfers Presenter: All Discussion/Summary: Kevin discussed the process of SPED transfers. The time between a family moving and getting information to begin the transfer process is too long and we are paying for all that time. Kevin suggests submitting a letter to the super- intendent and SPED director that the child has moved and close that gap in time as quickly as possible. Katie says she would be interested in looking more into that because they have similar things going on. School makes IEP transfer and CSA makes their funding transfer so if there’s a way to streamline that process, it could be very beneficial. Katie recommends that we address this in our local policy. Next Steps/Action(s): Katie will follow up with Angela. Jennifer will share the transfer letter with Kevin. CSA Coordinators will submit a local policy revision to CPMT. Agenda Item: Discussion and Engagement- Review of Work Plan Presenter: All Discussion/Summary: Next Steps/Action(s): Agenda item tabled Agenda Item: Discussion and Engagement- Legislative Updates Presenter: Discussion/Summary: Next Steps/Action(s): Agenda item tabled Agenda Item: Discussion and Engagement- What are you looking forward to in the new year? Presenter: All Discussion/Summary: Next Steps/Action(s): Agenda item tabled Mary Stebbins, Chair for Charlottesville CPMT, adjourned the meeting at: 10:30 A.M. Next scheduled meeting: February 2, 2023, at 9:00-10:30 A.M. in person meeting will be located at 5th Street County Office Building in Room 231 within Social Services area. Respectfully Submitted: Tayler Ellis