CALAVERAS COUNTY S COMMUNITY PROGRAM PLANNING AND LOCAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR CFTN PLAN UPDATE

Transcription

1

2

3 CALAVERAS COUNTY S COMMUNITY PROGRAM PLANNING AND LOCAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR CFTN PLAN UPDATE 30-day County Name Public Comment Period: _May 1, 2012 to June 5, 2012 Date of Public Hearing at MHB: _June 5, 2012 Instructions: Utilizing the following format please provide a brief description of the Community Program Planning and Local Review Processes that were conducted as part of this annual update/update per Title 9 of the California Code of Regulations, sections 3300 and Community Program Planning 1. Briefly describe the Community Program Planning (CPP) Process for development of all components included in the annual update/report. Include the methods used to obtain stakeholder input. Calaveras County utilized data obtained from the Mental Health Services Act Advocacy Committee (made up of consumers and family members) and the Mental Health Board to ensure that this Capital Facilities and Technological Needs (CFTN) Plan Update was an appropriate use of funds. Calaveras also used previous stakeholder input including: - Previous CPP input from the Community Services and Supports (CSS) 3 Year Plan - Previous CPP input from the CFTN Plan Update to the CSS 3 Year Plan - Monthly meetings with consumers and family members - One-on-one interviews with key stakeholders 2. Identify the stakeholder entities involved in the Community Program Planning (CPP) Process. (i.e., name, agency affiliation, population represented, age, race/ethnicity, client/family member affiliation, primary language spoken, etc.) Stakeholders involved recent and previous planning that has contributed to this CFTN Plan Update includes: - The Mental Health Board and other Calaveras County Community Members/Stakeholders - The Peers/Consumers and their Families, including Transitional Age Youth, Adults, and Older Adults, of the Mental Health Services Act Advocacy Committee and Consumer Leadership Team - Targeted Underserved Groups including Spanish-Speaking Latino & Native American Populations - Current staff of Calaveras County Behavioral Health Services (CCBHS) - CCBHS Partner Agencies/Organizations in the County, including Probation, Sheriff s Department, Calaveras Works and Human Services, and First 5 Calaveras Local Review Process 3. Describe methods used to circulate, for the purpose of public comment, the annual update or update. After this CFTN Plan Update was posted for 30-day public review and comment, Calaveras County utilized the following methods to ensure the posting was thoroughly publicized and available for review: - Posted an electronic copy on calaveras.networkofcare.org - Provided hard-copies at the Behavioral Health Services front desks for public access - Provided hard-copies to the Mental Health Services Act Advocacy Committee & Consumer Leadership Team - Submitted press release regarding the availability of the update and date of Public Hearing - Gave public comment at the Board of Supervisors regarding availability of the update and date of Public Hearing - Gave public comment at Mental Health Board regarding availability of the Update - Provided hard-copies to the Mental Health Board and attendees - Gave second public comment at Board of Supervisors regarding Public Hearing the day of the Public Hearing - Provided information to the Mental Health Board and community members at the Public Hearing 4. Include substantive comments received during the stakeholder review and public hearing, responses to those comments, and a description of any substantive changes made to the proposed annual update/report that was circulated. Indicate if no substantive comments were received. Comments received thus far have been positive; none have required changes to the following CFTN Plan Update. Page 1 of 1

4 CALAVERAS COUNTY S UPDATE TO THE MHSA THREE YEAR COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SUPPORTS PLAN Instructions: Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) section 5848 specifies that DMH shall establish requirements for the content of the annual update and updates including reports on the achievement of performance outcomes for services. An update many include a report on the overall progress of the County s implementation of the MHSA including CSS, WET, PEI, and INN components. NOTE: Implementation includes any activity conducted for the program post plan approval. CSS, WET, PEI, and INN 1. Briefly report on how the implementation of the MHSA is progressing, including program achievements and outcomes for services per WIC section Counties may also note whether implementation activities are generally proceeding as described in the County s approved Plan, any key differences, and any major challenges. Introduction This plan updates the previous Capital Facilities and Technological Needs Component to the Mental Health Services Act Plan for Calaveras County. The following would modify two areas of the previous plan: 1. The percentage Calaveras County decided to split between Capital Facilities and Technological Needs. Previously the split was 48% ($380,000) for Technological Needs and 52% ($408,500) for Capital Facilities. Under this new plan, the split will now be $100% ($788,500) for Technological Needs, which will leave a balance for future technological needs and expenses (see budget attached for this project). 2. The purchase of a new behavioral health software package for the Electronic Health Record (EHR). The software package Anasazi includes Client Data System, Scheduling System, Assessment & Treatment Planning System, and Doctor's Home Page and e-prescribing. Also included is a contract with Kings View Corporation for Anasazi technical, billing, application service provider, and help desk support. Background In 2004, the California Behavioral Systems (CBS) Coalition Project conducted a thorough RFI/RFP process for EHR software packages on behalf of 21 California counties, including the California Regional Mental Health System Coalition Joint Powers Authority (JPA) of counties, which included Calaveras. At that time, the clear choice of EHR providers was Anasazi. However, due to a lack of support options for small counties and difficult initial negotiations with the company, the JPA finally settled on Netsmart s Avatar software package in The Calaveras County Mental Health Program (MHP) has subsequently implemented Avatar and has been using the product in a limited capacity due to technical difficulties since that time. Planned components have not been implemented due to technical challenges and unexpected costs requiring additional support from Netsmart. With the possibility of the JPA dissolving and the MHP s current contract with Netsmart expiring 6/30/2012, new contract negotiations with Netsmart will need to be done by individual counties resulting in even higher costs for this software. Unfortunately, the Avatar software has not been the viable option many small counties were hoping to successfully implement. As such, a number of small counties have begun seeking other options, including the purchase of the Anasazi system through a contract with the Kings View Corporation. A few of the issues frequently encountered by small counties are listed below: Netsmart implemented the product differently in each county, thereby defeating the initial purpose of purchasing a software system which could be used uniformly by all of the counties Software requires a great deal of local technical support which is not feasible for a small county Documentation of code (required for in-house customization) is poor or not available Netsmart Help Desk services is not timely and very cumbersome to use Data required for the MHP annual mental health cost reporting and audits is not reliable Software updates usually disrupt other functions causing unexpected down-time for users The user interface is outdated and not user-friendly causing slow learning curves and user satisfaction System components lack thorough integration, therefore, some components have not been implemented Overall, the company has been unresponsive with support and general user needs These problems have had a significant impact on productivity, billing, and quality of care. The JPA has also incurred attorney and consulting fees in order to require Netsmart to comply with its contract with the JPA. At this time, several member counties have either left or are planning to leave the JPA to contract with one of the two remaining MediCal Mental Health EHR providers in the state. If there are no member counties left, the JPA will be forced to disband. This will necessitate the MHP to choose between continuing with the current product or contracting with another. Page 1 of 2

5 CALAVERAS COUNTY S UPDATE TO THE MHSA THREE YEAR COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SUPPORTS PLAN Plan After careful review and consultation with counties throughout the state, the MHP plans to contract for the Anasazi product. Key to this recommendation is that Anasazi now has a contract with Kings View, a California-based Behavioral Health Provider, to provide the necessary technical support for small counties. Kings View has a deep understanding of the Mental Health/MediCal business model in California. Kings View will host the EHR database for Anasazi as well and provides support for multiple small counties at this time. Had this arrangement been available at the time of the original decision, the JPA would certainly have chosen the Anasazi product over Avatar. Justification for Sole Source Purchase: Previous Vendor comparisons in 2004 and 2008 Anasazi in conjunction with Kings View provide a unique Software/Service package ideal for small counties Of the three main vendors in California (Netsmart, Anasazi and ECHO) we use two and found their software/service level inadequate. The decision to move from Avatar to Anasazi is based on the RFP conducted by CBS (2004), the RFP done by DMH (2008) and our experience about Echo (System used by Behavioral Health until 2007) and Avatar. In 2008 the California Department of Mental Health (DMH) formed a coalition of 27 California counties to conduct a RFP for EHR. Twenty-three (23) companies responded and DMH tabulated the results of the bids making this information available to all Counties. The MHP has contacted some of the counties currently using the Anasazi software and they are very pleased with the partnership between Anasazi and Kings View. This partnership is the key to successful helpdesk services, cost reports, updates, and other services and supports. Anasazi focuses on updating their system to stay timely with all of the Health Care Reform, HIPAA transactions, billing requirements, and the changes that are going on within the State of California Departments. Kings View focuses on customer support such as: helpdesk, cost reports, billing issues, transaction codes, and clinical charts. The partnering of these two companies to support small counties that do not have the funding to hire their own technical experts regarding all of the issues discussed above is the key to a successful EHR. There is no other behavioral health software vendor that offers such a complete package for small counties. Timeline The MHP currently contract with Netsmart (Avatar) through the JPA to take advantage of the buying power of multiple counties. The majority of counties in the JPA are leaving Netsmart by the end of this fiscal year. With the possibility of the JPA dissolving and the MHP s current contract with Netsmart expiring 6/30/2012, new contract negotiations with Netsmart will need to be done by individual counties resulting in even higher costs for this software. Based on these circumstances, the MHP has set 1/1/2012 as a tentative go-live date to begin using Anasazi (initially in test mode). Page 2 of 2

6