Docstoc

Task Force Minutes Task Force to Study the DDA Rate Payment Systems

Document Sample
Task Force Minutes Task Force to Study the DDA Rate Payment Systems Powered By Docstoc
					Minutes for Task Force Meeting
Date: March 10, 2008
Time: 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

Meeting called to order at 1:10 p.m.

Review of Minutes from 2.11.07

      Board of Nursing Corrections (Ted Giovannis wanted to verify that BON did not reply to
       his questionAudrey or Jim, any way you want to address?
      Approved minutes from February 11, 2008


Supported Employme nt
Ms. Cathy Lyle (see pink handout)
Mr. Johnson
    Is there a cost differential?
    Ms. Lyle’s response: Yes, there is a different intensity for each type of job a consumer
       looks for.
    Should the actual identification of job be a grant process, rather than a daily cost
       reimbursement?
Mr. Adkins
    The cost at the beginning versus later down the line when looking for a job
    Recently had to turn down an individual who needs a one to one to find a job and needs a
       one to one job coach
    Need to hire for individuals for job coaches
    Once individual is employed and fairly self-sufficient, individual needs a lot less supports
           o Provider is then paid every day, even though consumer is employer
    Key is at beginning of finding job
    The MOU between DDA and the Division of Rehabilitation Services should be re-
       examined
    Has individuals in workshop settings; takes a lot of money to find them jobs in
       community
           o Some individuals benefit greatly from segregated day settings
           o Some job coaches actually do the job when they go with individual in community

Mr. Lovell
    Transportation is problematic b/c of different kinds of employment
    Individual may have employer separate from provider
    Different settings get different funding
    Most providers would like to see employers employ consumers and the provider provide
      the supports
    Time is an issue: many consumers in a part-time employment; can be good or bad


                                                1
      Transportation to the supported employment is an issue
           o Need access to public transportation
           o Need provider to transport them to job
      Public school system issue: job training was provided at public school system
           o Does not transition when the individual ages out
      Should look at difference between rehabilitation services and DDA memorandum
      We are all strong advocates for individuals to have employment in community, but
       realistic that not everyone can get employment in community
      Need to work long hours

Ms. Mills
    In past, Ms. Mills received supports from a workshop setting
          o 7 years
          o Did not feel agency provided any supports
          o Individuals were plopped into her workshop setting, still there after 20 years
          o Should know what is out in community
    Another individual: receives supports
          o Has position out in community
          o Very happy
          o Old Management happy with individual
          o New management trying to get individual out slowly
    One person once came home with 11 cent paycheck: was cost of paper for paycheck and
      transportation worth her goingresponse to Mr. Adkins regarding segregated settings
    Why aren’t programs finding something for individuals to do in community to get
      income?

Mr. Schnorf
    No statistics, but appears to be large turnover

Ms. Lyle
      Would grant be performance based?


Del. Montgomery
     Funding of grants may be difficult
     Continuous re-application
     May lose funding

Mr. Giovannis
    Would a grant be lost over time?
    Could you make it part of the base? Not an augmentation grant




                                               2
Ms. Waters
    Augmentation grants no longer exists; add-ons instead
    More of a contract that would be available year-to-year

Mr. Schulz
    SE model is good
    Billing is rigid and biggest problem

Ms. Mulazim
    Her agency does not provide SE
    Offer similar to Ms. Mills situation about workshop setting



Public Testimony on Supported Employment
MACS Testimony (Karen Lee, SEEC & Alliance)
   Has worked in SE for a long time; both federally and regionally
   Federal govt. is moving away from RSA (DORS) towards labor/workforce investment
     boards
   SE model: only pay for someone who works 4 hours/day
   25% job development; 75% getting to know/following upthe worse the match, more
     support
   Customized employment: match the job better to individual
        o More technical assistance
        o Insurgence of information
        o Combo of day habilitation and SE
        o Empowers individuals with DD to get out of poverty
   Not sure of MD’s ranking in SE
   Current funding is too restrictive (use day rehab for SE for funding)
   Not under funding regulations, SE under other regulations
   Disconnect in DDA rates
   Current annual SE rate is divided over 7 days not 5
        o Some funds not making it to provider

Alliance
     Do not have workshop setting
     Almost everyone in community
     Difficult under current system
     23 employment specialist (a few years ago); currently 12; with same number of
       consumerstherefore, caseload is higher
     Job placement is lengthy process
     Grossly underfunded; direct care is about $1.00, but pay job coaches about $13/hour
          o Individual must be flexible and have many skills
          o Higher expertise



                                              3
      Transportation cost is about 1/3 of cost; just visiting employers and sites is largest
       expense and not paid for
           o Reimbursement is based on shelter workshop, not real community placement
      Paid by the day: if individual works 3 days, get 3; not 5; part-time work is almost
       preferred; results in fraction of funding
      Contrast with MHA model; all individuals get same rate, not based on days worked
      Doors situation: immediately placed on waiting list; supposed to be paying for job
       development; reduction in funds; not getting SE funding through Doors
      6-8 months waiting list

Ms. Lyle:
    Part-time: what do they do if they don’t go to workshop?
    Answer: they choose to work only a few days; they do not go to a day program; might go
       to community activities
           o One individual worked 3 days a week at 3hours a daycould not bill
    Answer (Karen Lee): stamina issues
           o Some individuals can only work a few hours a day
           o Possible discrimination issue b/c some consumers cannot work 4 hours/day


Public Testimony on Self-Direction

Michael Bloom: See handout

Barbara Moore
    Choose own staff
    Budget; fiscal management service
    List of what is spent; budget to train staff
    Meeting once a month with her team to discuss her situation: goals, health, etc.
    I am well-respected and have self- worth
    Anyone who can should be allowed to be in self direction
    Yes, can switch my budget around
          o Ex.: Meeting last Monday
          o $$ was not being utilized
          o Insurance for support staff to go horse back riding
          o One staff for several months
          o Previous provider had a lot of staff turnover
    Ms. Mills: has similar situation but not with New Directions
          o Have to be approved by DDA
          o Categories for $$$
          o Is New Directions the same? Yes

Ken Capone
    Public Policy Coordinator for People on the Go




                                                4
      Some members on Community Pathways waiver; want to change to New
       Directionshave better self direction with New Directions
      Can choose living situation, staff, etc.
      Decrease in quarterly meetings b/c of transportation issues
      Urge to consider expanding New Directions
      Remove financial barriers to self direction
      Need as much independence as possible
      Ms. Mills: heard same as Kenny that transportation is unavailable for those wanting to go
       to the quarterly meetings

Committee Discussion on Self-Direction
Mr. Schulz
    Barriers: FPS or CSLA
    Two people of different funding stream cannot live togethershould be able to find a
       way to do so
    Greater independence costs more to support
    Absurd situation that individuals want to marry but need a roommate
    Acknowledging that this is more expensive

Mr. Adkins
    Disagrees with Mr. Schulzdoes not have to be more expensive
    Two consumers with different funding streams: residential funding for one was switched
      to CSLA; will cost less; savings of $30-40K
    Can go the other way too

Ms. Mills
    Not more expensive to support out in the community b/c each individual has their own
      set of $$ (budget) from DDA
    My $$ is less b/c I need less supports
    Not more cost
    Married couple (Mr. Schulz): I believe it may have to do with Section 8 and SSI;
      combined income for couple

Ms. Lyle
    Back to Mr. Shulz about residential and CSLA consumers living together? Is that a
       regulation?
    Ms. Waters: yes, b/c streams are separate. But can convert to change residential to CSLA
    Mr. Johnson: model that was developed incorporates more than 1-2 people living
       together

Ms. Mulazim
    Similar situation: married couple were able to reduce their funding, savings b/c switch
      funding stream

Mr. Giovannis


                                               5
      How does an individual’s budget get developed? Can it change?
      Ms. Waters:
           o Matrix score
           o Funding associated
           o Provider and individual consumer discuss options
           o CSLA is similar (except consumer is living at home with supports)
    Mr. Lovell: matrix score is fixed (for residential, SE, and day)
           o CSLA has more flexibility b/c based on hours served
           o Regulatory process/waiver: could we more flexible in our system so that funding
              streams are not so rigid?
Rick Callahan (ARC of Central Chesapeake)
    Budget development for self-direction
    Person directed process
    Line item budget
    Can move $$ around as long as DDA approves
    Hardest part of moving $$ around is between Medicaid funding and things such as food
    Arc of Chesapeake is one of two fiscal managers in MD
    Mr. Romans: how do you determine $$?
           o Answer: Self-direction is based on needs and team assessment
           o Risk pool for emergency services
           o Most consumers seem to stay within budget
    Mr. Johnson: you are just fiscal managers
           o Answer: yes
           o Individuals are their own employers

CSLA

Ms. Mulazim
    40-82 hours of service (on average); most do not receive awake-overnight
    Consumers seem to more independent and less court involved
    Some like staff, some do notmore flexible model and can get new staff if wanted

Public Testimony on CSLA

Tim Weins (Jubilee)
    See handout
    100 individual: 50% in residential; 50% in CSLA; all in Montgomery County
    CSLA in less need of fixing; not as underfunded
    Overview of CSLA
         o More hours provide; less money you get
         o More people that live together, the better for provider b/c of hours
             overlapproblematic
    DDA began auditing: there is justification
         o However, not viable system
         o Example:


                                              6
                     MAPS MD does audit
                     Chose 10 of clients served out of 50
                     Of 10, over in some and under in some
                     Ended up providing more hours overall but b/c of fewer hours for those
                      few consumerslikely to lose money
                   Not much of incentive to reduce hours b/c of risk management
                   More flexibility for overall hours of service provided
                   Still have individual accountability (i.e. switch providers)
                   Resource coordinators, licensing, oversight
          o   Mr. Schulz: Piggy-backing on Mr. Weins comments about total overall hours.
              Similar to residential, should not be counted against provider if can provide
              appropriate hours, overlapping hours. One-sided approach; resource driven; cost-
              containment issues. Legislative audit requirements: should check. Very rigid.
          o   Mr. Schnorf: Is there flexibility in CSLA system (of needing 3 individuals)?
              Answer: Yes, some. No barrier, but need to go back to DDA. $$ is usually only
              for crises. If reduction in number of individuals is crisis, might be able to do it.
          o   Mr. Schnorf: If clients need 2 hours each and live together, why should it be
              counted as 4 instead of 2? Answer: B/c client hours overlap, counts against
              provider (not always, but often).
          o   Ms. Mills: If staff person is there for 2 individuals, whose budget does it come out
              of? Answer: both.
Rick Callahan
    Housing
           o 211 individuals (87 in CSLA)
           o Housing was standardized when CSLA began: standard no longer being applied
              in today’s market
           o CSLA is most self-directed model, outside of New Directions
           o Depending on region, may or may not get housing
                    Get 1/3 of rent per individual
           o Proposing to go back to HUD guidelines; no need for new system
           o Biggest barrier for CSLA is housing cost
           o Ms. Lyle: Do HUD guidelines include food? Answer: Housing does not include
              food, but does include utilities
           o Mr. Lovell: What would you recommend? Answer: HUD is ok, but need
              discussion around food costs; food stamps are not even close
    Nursing
           o Additional mandates increase costs
           o CSLA, at first, did not have nursing costs included in plans
           o Population is aging
           o Current professional rate is $26/hour
           o Unclear if nursing is in the rate
           o Almost impossible to get hours PLUS nursing services; should be a supplemental
           o Health risk screening tool: to assess nursing needs
                    Unsure as to acuity of tool
           o Could use Medicaid rate for reimbursement
    Something needs to be built in for escalating costs


                                               7
      Mr. Schulz: do you think health screening tool can lower costs? Answer: Yes.


Mr. Lovell: Service Funding Plans
    If DDA provides housing in CSLA budget, is that state funding?
    Yes, because Medicaid does not reimburse for housing.
    Does it make sense to look at cost of care and adjust to CSLA?
           o Answer: CSLA does not have cost of care, but not sure.
Mr. Giovannis: Cost- neutral.
    Ms. Waters: CSLA is not a facility-based model
           o Looks at plan and numbers of hours in plan

Rick Callahan: Might be cost-neutral, but not necessarily with federal match $$.
    Greater flexibility in ???
   


Other Business
Mr. Johnson
    Next meeting
          o Rough draft of suggested recommendations
          o FPS Matrix discussion
          o Cost of Living Adjustments
          o Add-ons


Future Meetings

Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in Columbia, Owen Brown Interfaith Center (email to
follow with address)




                                                8

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:8
posted:12/29/2010
language:English
pages:8
Description: Task Force Minutes Task Force to Study the DDA Rate Payment Systems