grants administration process overview jim pearsol may 17,2010
DESCRIPTION
Grants Administration Process Overview Jim Pearsol May 17,2010. Purpose. To protect and improve the Public’s health The customer is the public Create a robust business partnership across the entire enterprise Standardize and simply processes wherever and whenever possible - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
To protect and improve the Public’s health The customer is the public Create a robust business partnership across the
entire enterprise Standardize and simply processes wherever and
whenever possible Consider: Who? What? When? Where? Why? and
How? Potential benefits: reduce waste, eliminate
duplication, save time, improve performance, better documentation of success and improved health outcomes, and an opportunity to celebrate
Common components of a grants administration process
Key control points Examples of incentives Examples of tactical options New developments on the horizon State examples (OH, MI and IA)
Federal Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA)
Federal application process: federal forms, state clearinghouse forms, assurances, program and fiscal approvals and signatures, budget and personnel review and approvals, final sign-off and submission
Receipt of federal NOA: special conditions, loading into state systems (budget and acct’g), federal grant modifications (approvals and spending plans)
Subgrantee RFP*: creation of RFP – program and fiscal elements, subgrantee eligibility requirements (notice to subgrantees?), final sign-offs, release of RFP, standardized elements?
Subgrantee Application*: Receipt of RFP, preparation of narrative and fiscal elements, review and sign-off steps, submission of application, notice of receipt of application
* Can these run concurrently with any prior steps?
Internal grants management process (from receipt of subgrantee application to approval and NOA):
review of applications – narrative and budget special conditions* non-selected and selected applicant reviews,
approvals, and signoffs preparation of purchase requisition and cover
letter, filing of entire package into a project folder
(master file?)
*including any outstanding audit issues?
Purchase order process:
Purchase order prepared and cross-checked with approved application
Send NOA and package to subgrantee Prepare payment transmittal form Accounting assures cash is available Disburse initial funds
(how is this done in CO?)
Subgrantee responsibilities:
Compliance with any special conditions Implementation of PH program Submission of required fiscal and program
documentation (procedures? time frames?) Local oversight and/or fiscal procedures Annual reconciliation reports Audits required by law
Federal/state health agency program and fiscal monitoring responsibilities:
Implementation of PH program Site visits and reports Desk reviews and reports Failure to comply (consequences) Budget modification processes* - fiscal limits
and how often in a grant period, “no cost” extensions, changes in scope or amount of award, etc.
* a “hidden,” complicating element of a GAP
Completion of required reports and closeouts:
Interim FSR Close-out procedures Return of unused funds Final FSR Failure to comply (consequences)
Documentation of certifications (SHA to federal and subgrantee to SHA)
Director’s approvals Award matches request Elimination of fiscal exceptions (management
overrides and straight debits for payments to subgrantees)
Documentation of compliance with deadlines (applications/NOAs/budget revisions/etc)
Documentation of compliance with special conditions
Documentation of compliance with final closeout
One-time submission of certifications
Standard RFP format
Standard project reporting elements
Earned budget flexibility after meeting defined compliance criteria
Create flowchart, with documentation, of GAP Create a GAP policies and procedures manual
for both internal and external audiences Create a standardized master file for all
subgrant project folders (electronic preferred) Implement a comprehensive, ongoing internal
and external GAP training program Establish a minimum dollar threshold for
subgrants Establish a robust subgrantee audit program
ASTHO/CDC joint project on improving grant processes (BSIP)
ARRA grant requirements
Fiscal intermediaries
Health reform funding
PHAB fiscal standards and measures
Consistent and more flexible carry-over policy
Standardize no cost extensions and budget modifications
Reduce the degree of detail in budget submission requirements
Standardize data and reporting element requirements
Eliminate IT “stand alones”
Standardize, or at least simplify, project period/budget period start dates
Transparent performance tracking process Standardize minimum lead time for preparing
applications in response to grant guidance Specify Business Process Metrics and Key
Sign-offs Timely issuance of grant/cooperative
agreement guidance including ample time for application preparation and submission
Don’t combine (or mask) budget cuts with integration
Reduce variation and differences in “rule interpretations” by PGO, programs and states
Create standard applications, invoicing and reporting
Clarify and standardize maintenance of effort and match requirements
real-time transparent process for tracking status of requests
Confirm agency assurances once annually Create a means for tracking expenditures –
more refined than timing of state “drawdowns.”
Track performance on outcomes rather than on processes
Keep track of categorical funds but allocate to states in a blended fashion when appropriate
Initiate an appeals process
Link any expansion of program requirements (mid grant) with an associated increase in funding
Conduct proactive needs assessments from state and local partners
Workloads and expectations should be more commensurate with funding levels
Explore the possibility of multi-year grants Simplify the continuation process Expand the allowable spending period beyond
the prescribed 12 month budget period
Provide Financial Management Systems Standard A2 B: Establish effective financial
management systems. A2.1 B: Comply with requirements for externally
funded programs ◦ Audited financial statements ◦ Program reports
A2.2 B: Maintain written agreements with entities providing processes, programs and/or interventions delegated or purchased by the public health agency◦ Two examples of current written contracts/MOUs, MOAs
for processes, programs and/or interventions
A2.3 B: Maintain financial management systems
Examples of Documentation◦ Annual agency budget approved by governing entity ◦ Two examples of financial reports (at least quarterly) ◦ Audited financial statements
Other Examples of Documentation ◦ Documentation that audit has been reviewed by the
governing entity and/or key agency staff ◦ Documentation that financial reports reviewed by the
governing entity and/or key agency staff
A2.4 B: Seek resources to support agency infrastructure and processes, programs and interventions
Examples of documentation ◦ Annual budget submission ◦ Budget revisions ◦ Additional funding requests ◦ Grant applications and fundraising ◦ Newspaper articles/letters to the editor on the need for
improvement in public health (can be issues specific) ◦ Public Health meeting discussing public health funding
For more information:
http://www.phaboard.org/assets/documents/PHABStateJuly2009-finaleditforbeta.pdf
Thank [email protected]
Comprehensive GAP policy and procedures manual
http://www.odh.ohio.gov/pdf/GAPManual/GAPMANUAL.PDF
“A-Z” list of recommended changes
Kaizen Blitz to streamline process
Department of Community Health (State Health Agency)
Department of Environmental Health (Water, Sewage, Campgrounds, and Swimming Pool Programs)
Department of Agriculture (Food Service Safety Programs)
By state statute the State Health Agency is responsible for the provision of health services to Michigan Citizens
Statute provides the State Health Agency the option to grant local health departments authority to act on its behalf for primary responsibility and delivery of public health services to Michigan Citizens
The State Health Agency has exercised this option
State Statute requires each county to provide for a county health department
The legal local governing entity in Michigan is defined as a county
45 local health departments serving Michigan’s 83 counties and the city of Detroit:
30 are single county departments 14 are multiple county district Health
departments 1 city health department 37 of the 45 local health departments are
classified as rural health departments
Boards of Health are optional except where there is a district health department
District boards of health are comprised of two elected officials (commissioners) from each county in the district
CPBC is a contractual agreement between the State Health Agency and each of the 45 local health departments
The contract is the administrative and legal mechanism through which categorical grants and other funds are disbursed or allocated to fund required services
The contract contains the majority of State Health Agency funded programs including those administered by the Departments of Environmental Quality and Agriculture
The 45 CPBC agreements collectively contained 62 local health service programs and funding of $101,623.860
Contains Six Components 1) Boilerplate Parts I 2) Boilerplate Parts II 3) Budget-includes instructions, standard
budget forms, amendment process 4) Output Reporting – H-977-contains
output measures for specific programs as established by program staff
5) Special Requirements-includes Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs), check off list, special requirements that do not have MPRs
6) Allocation Schedule-contains allocations, defines programs as staff, fixed unit rate, performance, and includes performance measures
Each program has a budget, performance indicators, and reporting requirements
Standard forms are used for all programs and are itemized by program then rolled up to a combined budget
When possible reporting requirements are redefined as Minimum Reporting Requirements (MPRs)
Special reporting requirements are contained in a Special Reporting Section of the agreement
The very extensive reporting requirements continue to be a barrier to moving from standardization to true contract consolidation
February-Previous agreements sent to MDCH Programs for review by MDCH Grants and Purchasing Division
March-Revised agreements returned to Grants and Purchasing Division
April-Final revised agreements returned to Programs for approval
April-Approved agreements returned to Grants and Purchasing Division
May-New agreements for all programs mailed out to local health department
June-August-Local health department obtains County or BOH approval
September-Signed agreements returned to Grants and Contracts Division
October – start new fiscal year
Local health departments are reimbursed monthly at 1/12 of planned/approved budget amount
Local health departments submit quarterly financial status reports (FSRs) detailing funds expended
Local health departments submit an estimated FSR for the last quarter (July,Aug,Sept.)
Submit final adjusted actual FSR report by January 31.
Local health department may request advance operating funds through a formal process
All forms (FSR, Budget, Medicaid Cost-based reimbursement forms in spreadsheet format)
Best practice guidelines Instructions for completing forms Instructions for completing local
maintenance of effort reports Calendar of due dates Contact directory
* a procedures manual
Grants and Contracts Division, MDCH-Serves as a connector between programs and local health departments, ensure schedules are kept, performs financial reviews, generates payments
Office of Local Health Services, MDCH-Serves as the single point of contact for local health departments to reach any part of MDCH. Staffs the annual standards review and funding formula local/state committees
Program Divisions-Performs program reviews, approves/doesn’t process payments
Top Leadership Commitment-Three state department directors meet quarterly with local health department leadership to deal with policy and financial issues
Principles of Collaboration Agreement-signed by three state department directors and the leadership of local public health pledging to work together in a collaborative manner on all issues relating to the provision of public health services to Michigan citizens
Information Technology-Active sharing of hardware, software, networking, and technical resources by and between local health departments, especially important to smaller local health departments
Local Resource Sharing-Local health departments not big fans of formal consolidation of local health departments but do utilize an associated contractual arrangement where local health departments share resources, people, technology.
The associated contractual relationship allows resource sharing but each county retains its own governing entity, budget, and organization.
MI state accreditation provides the final piece of the Standardized contractual relationship between the state and local health departments.
MI accreditation uses the same MPRs Site visits once every 3 years replaces
annual individual program reviews including the WIC management evaluation
Affords an opportunity for program staff and local health department staff to interact on a regular basis in a positive collaborative way.
Thank you!
Iowa Department of Public Health
Service ContractingKaizen EventReport Out“Contract Transformers” November 2-6, 2009
The “Contract Transformers” TeamJody
50
Cheryl Christie-DPH, Bruce Brown-DPH, Kathi Nelson Hancock, John McMullen-DPH,Sherry Frizell-DPH,Sheri Stursma-DPH,Stacey Hewitt-DPH, Dawn MouwDPH, Mindy Uhle-DPH,Doreen Christensen-Cerro Gordo, Mark Vander Linden-DPH, Erin Barkema-DPH, Tim Wickam-DPH,Diana Von Stein-DPH, Jody Lane-Molnari-DHS, Chris Everson, MN Marcia Tope-DHS, Mike Rohlf-DM,
Insert team picture here
ScopeDawn
This event will address the service contracting process from when the Iowa Department of Public Health program initiates the writing of the competitive selection document to the date the fully executed contract is sent to the contractor.
51
GoalsSherry
1. Decrease time from application deadline to contract signature by 50%
2. Contract issued to contractor a minimum of 30 days prior to start date
3. Reduce steps in the internal review process by 50%4. Eliminate duplication of core information from each
provider for different applications by fiscal year 2011 contracts
5. Meeting established timeline 100%
52
ObjectivesSheri1. A stream-lined process that improves efficiency and
timeliness 2. Strengthen relationships with our internal and external
customers3. Standardized expectations for the internal and external
customers4. Standardized terminology and formats across programs5. Improve communication with external and internal
customers regarding process and responsibilities (including training)
6. Establish timeline of RFP/contract process from start to finish
7. Establish accountability
53
Clear objectives Team process Tight focus on time Quick & simple Necessary resources immediately available Immediate results (new process designed by end of week) 5S “mindset”--use the steps to support the event activities
Sort, Set in order, Shine, Standardize, Sustain
54
Kaizen Methodology Marcia
Current ProcessTim
55
Insert picture of current process here
BrainstormingMark
Establish accountability Eliminate Document Review Define roles and responsibilities Increase use of technology Establish clear timelines Standardization of forms and processes Training (internal and external) Improved communication (internal/external)
56
New ProcessCheryl
57
Insert picture of new process here
ResultsDiana
58
CURRENT Tobacco Behavioral Health HPCDP ADPER
Total Steps 188 214 194 218
Total Delays 11 14 11 11
Average (BC) Delay Time – Days (WC)
25 40 25 25
262 302 262 262
Value Added Steps
5 5 5 5
Decisions 12 16 13 20
Loop Backs 3 3 3 3
Total Handoffs 63 82 86 77
Lead Time - Days
315.5 314 313 307
ResultsErin
59
Current New % Change
Total Steps 814 120 85%
Total Delays 47 8 83%
Average Delay Time - Days
115 Nm nm%
1,088 nm nm%
Value Added Steps
8 3 63%
Decisions 61 12 80%
Loop Backs 12 1 92%
Total Handoffs 308 61 80%
Lead Time - Days
526.5 153 71%
60
Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date
1 Place power point on shared drive Cheryl Nov. 9
2 Draft intranet message Erin Nov. 9
3 Elimination of Doc. Review Erin Nov. 16
4 Communication plan – internal and external Bruce Dec. 7
5 Determine what data to collect to measure baseline for goals for team
Erin Dec. 7
6 Clarify Roles and Responsibilities Cheryl Dec. 7
7 Mandate timelines (internal processes) Mark Dec. 7
8 Development of checklist for first meeting Sheri Dec. 7
9 5 copies – needed?? Dawn Dec. 7
Homework John
61
Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date
10 Technology (WIKI, I-3, Share point, Hot Docs. Calendar) Dawn Dec. 7
11 Electronic Signature Dawn Dec. 7
12 Development of Tracking Spreadsheet Sheri Dec. 7
13 Posting of Q&A (process) Stacey Dec. 7
14 Resolution of late applications Tim Dec. 7
15 Lists serve notification Dawn Dec. 7
16 Follow-up survey to contractors (survey monkey) Erin Dec. 7
17 Evaluation Team John Dec. 7
18 Training plan-All Staff; Peer Training; Cross Training Stacey/Mindy Dec. 7
Homework Stacey
62
Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date
19 Training curriculum Stacey/Mindy Jan. 15
20 Master Calendar (public) Erin Dec. 14
21 Eliminating Duplication of Core Contractor Info. Cheryl Feb. 15
22 Standardization of application forms Diana Feb. 1
23 Development of policies and procedures Cheryl Feb. 1
Homework Stacey