PowerPoint Presentation

CSI Deliverable 5: County-Level CSI-FSP Linked ReportsOctober 29, 2014

This webinar was funded by the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC).Audio portion will begin shortly

IntroductionsKate Cordell, MPHThomas Weitzel

List ServeMHSOAC maintains a list serve with information relevant to countiesIf you would like to receive announcements, go to MHSOAC home page to sign up: http://www.mhsoac.ca.gov/default.aspx

CSI User ResourcesRecently Created Resources:CSI Data Quality Best Practices ReportCSI County-Level Data Quality ReportsCSI Statewide Data Quality ReportCSI Submission File Analysis ToolWebinars (email www.mhdata.org for user name and password)

Available via Resources Link on www.mhdata.org

CSI-DCR Linked County ReportsThe MHSOAC is hosting a project to provide each county with a one-time report with basic county-level and provider-level information, including, but not limited to, the following information about FSP partners served:Special Population ClientsNumber of Services by Types of ServicesLengths of ServiceDiagnosesGlobal Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores, where available

CSI-DCR Linked County ReportsThe report will use a data extracted from CSI and DCR from Aug, 2014

The reports will compare fiscal years 10/11 and 11/12 of county data

The focus of this webinar is to obtain input from counties and stakeholder on draft report format

Final reports will be delivered to all counties in late 2014

CSI-DCR Linked County ReportsGoals for todays webinar:

Review and demonstrate statewide example report

Present volunteer county feedback

Gather additional feedback and comments

CSI-DCR LinkageHierarchical Linkage Method matched 97% of partnersMatched even when no CSI number available in DCR

FSP vs. Not FSP ExampleFor Reports with Unique Client CountsJUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV Active FSPActive FSPCSIServicesFSPFSPFSPFSPNot FSPN/AN/AFSPParticipationFSP orNot FSPClients are FSP when they have an active FSP partnership and received services reported in the CSI system for the monthClients are Not FSP if they received services but have no active FSP partnershipClients are not reported if they did not receive services in the month (N/A)Sections of ReportAcknowledgementsDefinitions and AbbreviationsSection 1-1 Report OverviewSection 2-1 Clients Served Age GroupSection 2-2 Clients Served GenderSection 2-3 Clients Served Race and EthnicitySection 2-4 Clients Served Primary LanguageSection 2-5 Clients Served Preferred LanguageSection 2-6 Clients Served Diagnosis GroupSection 2-7 Clients Served IndicatorsSection 3-1 Client Services Information GAF ScoresSection 3-2 Client Services Information Special Population ServicesSection 4-1 Client Services Service TypesSection Appendix A Diagnosis Grouping CodesSection Appendix B Service Type GroupingsCSI-DCR Linked County ReportsMonthly Summaries

FY2010/2011 & FY2011/2012

Summary for County

Table for each Provider (identified from CSI)

Section 1-1 Report OverviewFSP = Partners who were actively enrolled in an FSP program and received any kind of CSI reported serviceNote: FSP Partners who did not receive any kind of CSI reported service will not be counted at all for the month of serviceNot FSP = Clients received any kind of CSI reported service and who were not actively enrolled in an FSP programNote: Clients who did not receive any kind of CSI reported service will not be counted at all for the month of service

Section 1-1 Report Overview3 Main Data SectionsClients Served (Section 2)Section 2-1 through 2-7, counts of clients are identified as FSP or Not FSP within each month of the two fiscal years A client is counted as served in FSP if they were served in an FSP program for at least one day during the month

Client Services Information (Section 3) & Client Services (Section 4)Services and related services information are identified as delivered to FSP or Not FSP clients using the exact dates of FSP participationA service is counted as FSP if the client was being served by an FSP program during the date of the service

Section 1-1 Report OverviewIn the Service Types report in Section 4-1, a client can be counted as both FSP and Not FSP if they were served in FSP for only part of the month such that some services were received while in FSP and some were received outside of FSP program participation

Monthly total client counts in the GAF Scores, Special Population Services, and Service Types reports may differ from those in the Clients Served sections.Section 2-1 Clients Served Age GroupChild (0-15)Transition Age Youth (16-25)Adult (25-59)Older Adult (60+)Not AvailableAll Clients

Section 2-2 Clients Served GenderFemaleMaleOtherUnknown / Not ReportedAll Clients

Section 2-3 Clients Served Race and EthnicityWhite or CaucasianBlack or African AmericanAmerican Indian or Alaska NativeFilipinoChineseCambodianHmongJapaneseKoreanOther Pacific IslanderSamoanAsian IndianOther AsianNative HawaiianGuamanianMienLaotianVietnameseHispanic or Latino EthnicityOtherUnknown / Not ReportedAll Clients

Section 2-4 Clients Served Primary LanguageAmerican Sign Language (ASL)Other Sign LanguageMandarinOther Chinese DialectsArabicMienArmenianCambodianCantoneseEnglishOther Non-EnglishPolishFarsiPortugueseFrenchRussianHebrewSamoanHmongSpanishIlocanoTagalogItalianThaiJapaneseTurkishKoreanLaoVietnameseUnknown / Not ReportedAll ClientsSection 2-5 Clients Served Preferred LanguageAmerican Sign Language (ASL)Other Sign LanguageMandarinOther Chinese DialectsArabicMienArmenianCambodianCantoneseEnglishOther Non-EnglishPolishFarsiPortugueseFrenchRussianHebrewSamoanHmongSpanishIlocanoTagalogItalianThaiJapaneseTurkishKoreanLaoVietnameseUnknown / Not ReportedAll ClientsSection 2-6 Clients Served Diagnosis GroupDepressive DisorderBipolar DisorderSubstance Abuse DisorderSchizophreniaAdjustment DisorderAnxiety DisorderDisruptive DisorderAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)Childhood DisordersPsychotic DisordersPost-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)Personality DisorderCognitive Disorder

Section 2-7 Clients Served IndicatorsSubstance AbuseTraumaAll Clients

Section 3-1 Client Services Information - GAF Scores Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) ScoreClient with Service & GAF ScoresTotal Clients with Services% with GAFLowest in MonthHighest in MonthMean Monthly

Section 3-2 Client Services Info - Special PopulationAssisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) services Reflects client information for clients who were identified as receiving Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) Services

Individualized Education Plan required (IEP) services Reflects client information for clients who were identified as receiving Individualized Education Plan required (IEP) services

Governors Homeless Initiative (GHI) services Reflects client information for clients who were identified as receiving Governors Homeless Initiative (GHI) services

Welfare-to-work (WTW) plan specified services Reflects client information for clients who were identified as receiving Welfare-to-work (WTW) plan specified services

Section 4-1 Client Services - Service Types All Service TypesCommunity Mental HealthMedication Support ServicesLinkage/BrokerageCollateralDay Treatment HalfDay Treatment FullResidentialCrisis InterventionCrisis Stabilization

AppendicesSection Appendix A - Diagnosis Grouping CodesSection Appendix B - Service Type Groupings

Feedback from Volunteer CountiesSolano, Placer & Yuba-Sutter counties provided feedback the reportFeedback Sections:HighlightsReport LayoutReport Sections/SubsectionsSection IntroductionsReport ClarityCounty/Organization UseAdditional Feedback

Feedback: HighlightsThe report provides a wealth of information in an organized fashionData could be useful in addressing issues raised in an audit related to service provided to different categories of consumer. Such as whether a group over or under represented in FSPsWe liked the sections and subsections breakdowns and the FSP comparison to Not FSP percentagesAll of the information was useful. The Age, Gender, Primary Language, Preferred Language, Race/Ethnicity are valuable cultural competence informationAppendixes were useful Accurate and timely information is always important to manage services and ensure best use of resources. For example, having the service data by provider is helpful in programming decisionsFeedback: Report LayoutProvide annual summaries of unduplicated client counts by County and Provider for all sectionsInclude graphs of annual summariesWould like to be able to view All Provider data separately from all Provider data

Feedback: Report Sections/SubsectionsThe All Providers reports offer the most useful information Would like to be able to hide the individual provider sheets unless I am looking for data about a specific providerAll of the sections have different uses and are useful and informative, but did not tell the ultimate story of the individuals served. The report was clear, but how the data derived from the data provided was not. We had to make some assumptions that may have been stated in the subsection, but not fully understood until we pulled the data to validate The GAF scores for Highest in Month, Average Monthly and Lowest in Month were almost always the same numbers for a specific month

Feedback: Section IntroductionsThe section introductions were well done. You did good job explaining the Race/Ethnicity categories and duplicated countsThe descriptions/introduction before each section were clear and helpful. In my review, I did have to refer back to the introduction, at times, to refresh my understanding of the dataEach section introduction was clear and gave the needed information for the section following. The date of birth calculated by the mid-fiscal year was assumed to be that if a client ages as of January 1 that the data in the proceeding 6 months is based on the age they are 6 months later

Feedback: Report ClarityMore clarification is needed for what is considered Not FSP. Is this data from the CSI data reported? We had many discussions on who was determined to be FSP vs Not FSPFeedback: County UseDiagnosis and services data can help the county identify patterns that raise questions about whether FSP eligibility requirements are being followed.Would like the data to tell a story. It would be beneficial to have data that tells more about where the partner comes from (incarceration days - up/down, homelessness - up/down, hospitalization - up/down), have they increased employment days, co-occurrence, days within the program, and if the partner went in and out of the program. It would be preferable to have a graph or pictorial that shows how the data has changed and shows a high-level for each breakdownThe monthly data will be useful in ensuring that data is being reported correctly and that staff are collecting the appropriate demographic data elements. Changing the report to include a recap of unduplicated annual totals (and by unduplicated quarterly totals) would be easier to share with stakeholders and easier to compare over timeAdditional FeedbackA tool similar to the EPLD to that would support queries by service, date and provider would enhance the utility of the dataIt would be interesting to see the Race and the Ethnicity data compared to Diagnosis Group, Age Group, Gender, and Service IndicatorsProgram management would like a report that gives a high level/less detailed report. It was felt that there was too much detail within the report that was reviewed and it was overwhelming in its enormity. It was felt that the report did not tell the story of the program

Next StepsIncorporate todays feedback into draft reports

Incorporate volunteer county feedback

Provide all counties with final reports by December 15

Related Upcoming ProjectsAdding a link between the Enhanced Partner-Level Data (EPLD) Templates Tool and the CSI Submission File Analysis Tool

Adding monthly reports to the CSI Submission File Analysis Tool for FSP, Non-FSP or All Clients such that timely county and provider-level reports can be run locallyQuestions?

MHDATA:info@mhdata.org

DHCS:medccc@dhcs.ca.govitws@dhcs.ca.gov

Thank you!!