1 / 31

Developing Systems for Performance Outcomes

Developing Systems for Performance Outcomes. Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Bernardino and Santa Clara Counties. Audit Scope and Process. For each component of the MHSA:

pembroke
Download Presentation

Developing Systems for Performance Outcomes

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

  1. Developing Systemsfor Performance Outcomes Los Angeles, Sacramento,San Bernardino and Santa Clara Counties

  2. Audit Scope and Process For each component of the MHSA: • Review and assess the method each county used to establish any performance measures and outcomes and determine if these measures and outcomes are meaningful and reasonable. • Evaluate the reasonableness of the methods used to obtain and analyze data to measure performance and outcomes • Identify key performance measures and outcomes achieved. • Review and assess the extent to which each county uses performance measures and outcomes to improve local mental health systems

  3. Selection of Counties for the Audit “To select the three counties, in addition to Los Angeles, to include in our review, we obtained and assessed information to identify the common boundaries for the three regions: Inland Empire, Bay Area, and Central Valley. Using the MHSA allocation amounts that we derived following the process described in the method column for Objective 3 (a) for fiscal years 2006–07 through 2011–12, we selected the county within each of the three defined regions that received the highest amount of MHSA funds.” From the MHSA Audit Report

  4. Four County Collaboration • Discussion and coordination of evaluation efforts • Review of each county’s strengths • Avoid re-inventing the wheel

  5. Tool Development • Each county shared their efforts in identifying goals and outcomes • Identified critical components of evaluation based on literature, experience, experts, and the audit • Identified common language • Over several weeks, worked all components into a single tool

  6. Application and Implementation • The tool should be modified to meet particular needs and context • All elements included need to be addressed by each county • Each county will share: • Their process of testing and/or implementing • To provide real-world application and clarity • To provide examples of adapting the tool

  7. Michelle Dusick Acting MHSA Coordinator Joshua P. Morgan, PsyD Research & Planning Psychologist County of San Bernardino

  8. San Bernardino’s Process • Attempted to create a more linear model for clarity • Recognizing that the actual program may not be linear • Separated process measures out to avoid confusing process measures and outcomes • Results: • Required Goals and Key Outcomes • Adapted logic model

  9. Santa Clara CountyResponse to Audit RecommendationThree Phases

  10. Phase II Component Level GoalsSCC Requirement

  11. SCC’s CSS Component Level Goals Reduction of subjective suffering from mental illness Increase meaningful use of time and capabilities in school, work, activity Reduce homelessness and increase safe and permanent housing Increase access to substance abuse treatment Increase natural networks of supportive relationships Reduction in multiple foster care placements Reduction in incarceration/juvenile justice involvement Reduction in disparities in service access Increase in self-help and consumer/family involvement

  12. Sacramento County FSP Program Tool Highlights • Tool was applied to FSP programs first • FSP programs more easily align with tool

  13. Sacramento County PEI Program Tool Highlights • Tool was applied to PEI Bullying Prevention & Education Program to test applicability • MHSA Goals based on reducing the seven negative outcomes

  14. Sacramento CountyApplication and Next Steps • Tool application across MHSA-funded programs to ensure plan goals are incorporated into FY14-15 contracts • Lessons learned • Outcome reporting to stakeholders, MHSA Steering Committee, etc.

  15. Los Angeles Our initial approach to defining program expectations: • Solicitations initially outlined program expectations • Service Exhibits attached to contracts defining the service, persons to be served, service delivery site expectations, essential program elements, outcome data collection requirements, performance-based criteria (process-oriented measures) • Development of service guidelines aided in implementation • Programs monitored to ensure compliance with documented service expectations and minimum staffing requirements

  16. Los Angeles – Next Steps • Work with MHSA age group and component lead staff to complete the grid • Engage in collaborative process to establish outcome benchmarks • Develop and disseminate outcome reports that assist providers and DMH staff in managing to and achieving benchmarks • Identify training and technical assistance needs related to benchmark attainment

  17. Application to MOQA Phase 2 • Develop a county-driven, common approach to establish program objectives, goals and outcomes • Create the ability to report statewide on the outcomes of behavioral health programs that can be used for quality improvement • Build on the four county audit work • Align with DHCS and MHSOAC planning

  18. Thank you! • Questions?

More Related