Chicago HIV Services Planning Group 2012 A Proposed Chicago Model UCHAPS 01/18/12

Transcription

1 Chicago HIV Services Planning Group 2012 A Proposed Chicago Model UCHAPS 01/18/12

2 CDPH HIV Prevention Overview National HIV/AIDS Strategy (NHAS) Enhanced Comprehensive HIV Prevention Planning and Implementation (ECHPP) Coordinated Local Efforts

3 Overview Background for Integrated Planning relates to NHAS The Proposed Chicago Model

4 NHAS Background Conclusion: 1. Resources: Tough choices must be made Allocation of resources will follow Epi data Address unmet needs. 2. Inclusive: Broad-Based Engagement with Federal and State Partners PLWH Community Partners. 3. Community Engagement at All Levels: Priority Setting Inform communities, encourage their engagement in all activities Encourage community partners to discuss new or different ways to serve their constitutes and clients.

5 NHAS Background 4. Research: Investment, Biomedical and Prevention Innovative Prevention Strategies Health Services 5. Commitment: Structural Intervention(s) Support communities in addressing: Health Disparity and Economic Challenges.

6 Source: UCHAPS

7 P R E V E N T I O N S U R V E L I L L A N C E C A R E T R E A T M E N T H O U S I N G The proposal aims to support coordination to facilitate integrated services at the client level and achieve maximum impact. Source: UCHAPS, Nieves-Rivera, 2010

8 Continuum of HIV Services Prevention Care Housing Other related services

9 Community Planning Prevention Planning Care Planning Housing Planning Other related planning needs

10 Goals Integrated planning for prevention, housing, and other treatment and care services Coordination across all systems Data integration

11 Drafting the Chicago Model Initiated in June 2011 Transparency with planning bodies (HPPG and Planning Council) Membership Recruitment Suspension of recruitment for all bodies Current memberships will be retained Created working group of co-chairs of HPPG and Planning Council Reviewed Integrated Models with working group Partner with community partners, providers, STI/HIV Division, and CDPH Executive Team

12 Potential Structure Total Membership Body: 41 Voting Member: 41 Alternates: 10 3 Full Body co-chairs: Community Elect, Community Select, Govt. Co-chair

13 Representation Community Leadership Local Health Department PLWH Providers (categories of representation) Affiliations and Liaisons Note: Refer to Federal Mandates (HRSA Ryan White Primer CDC Revised Planning Guidance

14 Integration Process Step 1. Formed a work-group made up of current CPG members from all active participating groups [prevention, care, housing, EQM, Social Services, and HD] Step 2. Research all aspects of integration i.e. funding cycles, key products, structure, bylaws & governance, membership criteria, etc Developed a timeline.

15 Integration Process Step 3. Workgroup developed the schedule of work for the committee i.e., agendas, timelines, trainings, orientations, membership criteria, mission, governance / by-laws, policy and procedures, etc. Report on-going reviews to all CPG Steering/Executive bodies then to be reported to CPGs full bodies.

16 Integration Process Step 4. Presented formal structure to Steering/Executive bodies for approval of draft then final CPG integration product. Steering/Executive bodies presented to full body for approval. Step 5. Vote to dissolve both planning bodies (in February) Step 6. An integrated Working Retreat/Orientation

17 Deliverables Comprehensive Plans: Prevention and Care PS: Prevention- Populations/Interventions Resource Allocation: Care Service Categories Gap Analysis/Needs Assessment (GA/NA): Prevention, Care, Housing, and other HIV Support Services. Evaluation/Quality Management (QM) Letters of Concurrence: Prevention

18 Deliverables Quality Management: Prevention, Care, Housing, and Support Services Consolidated Action Work Plan for Prevention, Care, and Housing Consolidated By-Laws Recruit membership selection committee

19 Integration Core Principles Transparency Inclusion Feasibility Accountability Respect

20 Considerations Number of members that make up a quorum. Membership length of terms New Prevention Planning Guidance Respectful transition of current members Meeting schedules: Full body and committee meeting schedules (monthly vs alternate months), length of time

21 Considerations Concerns: Current integrated models are state-based, non-urban cities. Currently, no UCHAPS jurisdictions have an integrated model Integrated By-Laws Bring together multiple funding Synchronize planning cycles Name of planning body

22 Processes Chicago HIV Services Planning Group: Option 1: Pilot Project Steering Committee Prevention Care Housing Member Services NA/GA NA/GA NA/GA Governance Eval/QM Eval/QM Eval/QM Outreach Priority setting Priority setting Priority setting Capacity Building

23 Processes Chicago HIV Services Planning Group: Option 2 Steering Committee Prevention Care (incl. Housing) SAMHSA Member Services NA/GA NA/GA NA/GA Eval/QM Eval/QM Eval/QM Priority setting Priority setting Priority setting

24 Processes Chicago HIV Services Planning Group: Option 3 Steering Committee Prevention Care (incl. Housing) Linkage to Care Member Services NA/GA NA/GA NA/GA Eval/QM Eval/QM Eval/QM Priority setting Priority setting Priority setting

25 Processes Chicago HIV Services Planning Group: Option 4 Steering Committee NA/GA Eval/QM Priority Setting Member Services Prevention Prevention Prevention Governance Care Care Care Outreach Housing and Other Services Housing and Other Services Housing and Other Services Capacity Building

26 Update Model chosen: Option 1 with Option 4 as a goal Janary 2012: Membership recruitment March 2012: Integrated planning with new slate New Name Selection Chicago Area HIV Integrated Services Council (CAHISC)

27 Questions