1 / 19

What Did We Say We Were Going to Do

Tri-Level Performance Measurement Paradigm. . . . . . Client and Services Tracking. Individual Client Outcomes Tracking. Monitoring / Quality Assurance / Oversight (multi-stakeholder process). Staff / Provider Evaluation / Satisfaction with regard to mental health system. Client / Family Sati

kyle
Download Presentation

What Did We Say We Were Going to Do

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    2. Tri-Level Performance Measurement Paradigm

    9. Accountability and Measurement of Outcomes, Objectives and Process

    11. We can measure our achievement of particular objectives and interim outcomes on the path toward our ultimate (long term) goals/outcomes.

    13. FSP Strategies Review and Discussion Evaluating and Documenting the Process -------- The “What” and the “How” of FSP Program Implementation

    14. FSP Strategies Review and Discussion An FSP strategy is not necessarily an EBP or “model”. Counties proposed service strategies reflective of their community planning process. Not a question of “model adherence” but knowing if process is now consistent with plan and objectives. Are FSP programs being implemented with respect to the “Key Constructs”? If so, what is being done, and how?

    15. FSP Strategies Review and Discussion Review of Exhibit #4s: What was proposed in FSP strategies? Evaluate the FSP strategies against the Key Constructs. Review and document the “whats” and the “hows” of implementation to evaluate the strategies.

    16. Areas in which to address the “Hows”: Operationally Administratively Programmatically Inter-agency Interpersonally Etc…

    17. Key Constructs of FSP Programs Community collaboration Cultural competence Client and family driven Wellness/recovery/resiliency focus Integrated services for clients and families (which could include health and substance abuse issues)

    18. Some FSP Strategy Specifics that Reflect the Spirit of the MHSA Use of flexible funding Interagency collaboration 24/7 service availability Single point of responsibility A “partnership” versus a provision of service to someone Shared decision making on an individual’s road to recovery. Linkage to or provision of all needed services Individualized service plan that is person centered, with individuals and their families given sufficient information to allow them to make informed choices Peer provided services Strategies that reflect the CSOC and Wraparound core values and principles have been incorporated for children, youth, young adults and families And more…..

    19. Report Back to the Group What is being done differently now in FSP programs under MHSA? (Choose one or two promising areas to share.) How are these new things being accomplished? Where is more info/specificity needed to understand the process better? What areas pose the greatest challenges or have barriers to be overcome? What are some action steps to address barriers? (Breakouts may provide some guidance.)

More Related