Budget and Audit Committee Minutes

Orsc

Informations

• Publié par: Mechag
• Nombre de lectures: 46
• Langue: English

Extrait

Budget and Audit Committee Minutes

Rehabilitation Services Commission

400 E. Campus View Blvd., Columbus, OH 43235

August 24, 2009

RSC staff in attendance:

David Daugherty Commissioner, Jacqui Romer-

Sensky, Commissioner, Bruce Growick, Commissioner, Joyce Young,

Commissioner, Michael Rench, Administrator, Chris Hansen,

Chief Financial

Officer, Kathy Johnson, BDD Director, Mike Hanes, BSVI Director, Marc

Protsman, Fiscal, Steve Tribbie, Fiscal, Amadou Diallo, Fiscal, Travis Sherick, IT

Acting Team Leader, Cheryl Martinez, Assistant Director, VR and Shirley Marchi,

Executive Assistant

Guests:

OARF Executive Director Julie Keil; SILC Executive Director Brenda

Curtiss; Kelly Manns, Ohio Association of Goodwill Industries; Debra Shinoske,

Goodwill

Teleconference participants:

Joyce Young, Commissioner

Open Meeting

Welcome and Introductions

At 9:05 a.m. Chair Daugherty called the meeting to order.

Approval of Agenda

Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved to approve the agenda, seconded by

Commissioner David Daugherty.

Motion carried.

Minutes

Commissioner Romer-Sensky moved to approve the July 8, 2009 Budget and

Audit Committee Meeting Minutes, seconded by Commissioner Daugherty.

Motion carried.

Public Comment

No one registered for public comment.

FFY 2010 Budget

CFO Hansen presented the FFY 2010 budget via a PowerPoint presentation

(Attachment A).

She reported on the federal funds stating the estimated amount

available for VR 110 is held at FFY 09 level pending passage of the federal

budget.

The VR 110 revenue drops from a projected $99 million in FFY 09 to a

projected $70.6 million in FFY 10.

A MOE penalty of $7.6 million is projected

absent additional third party match.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 2

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated regarding the $10 million dollars we are

anticipating as carryover, is this after paying the penalty?

CFO Hansen

responded that the penalty with MOE does not take affect until the following year.

The carryover is before the penalty, and FFY 11 is when the MOE penalty would

be assessed if we don’t find other sources of funding.

CFO Hansen reported the estimated Pathways revenue reflects additional

federal revenue projected to be received from the current expansion of the

Pathways program.

The stimulus funding is included for VR.

ILOB and IL Part B

stimulus funds are at the levels projected for use in FFY 10.

VR and ILOB are

expected to carryover funds into FFY 11.

The budget is very fluid with the

current economy. This is our best estimate based on known revenue at this time.

CFO Hansen stated the SSR funds are being used to fund the balance of VR ERI

costs and VR payroll.

She stated funding will be continued at current levels for

CCDs and the PCA program.

CFO Hansen stated the Third Party funds assume additional Pathways match

and renewal of existing Pathways for a total of $5.4 million.

She stated this line

item also includes FFY 10 match for ILOB stimulus funds.

Commissioner Daugherty agreed this is a fluid budget.

He asked, what is the

state’s position in reading the tea leaves?

CFO Hansen responded, we are

having continued discussions with OBM and watching the state’s budget.

There

may be additional GRF cuts.

From RSC’s perspective, we are looking to

increase third party agreements to fill the void caused by GRF reductions.

The

economy has not yet bounced back, and Ohio is historically one of the last states

to recover.

Administrator Rench stated, CFO Hansen asked him if RSC should

turn back $5 million in unmatched federal dollars and he said no.

He is trying to

come up with $1.4 million in match monies.

BSVI Director Hanes and BVR

Director Williamson are working with the Schools for the Deaf and Blind to see if

we can collaborate with them on their current capital projects.

We have met and

are meeting again with all DD Boards to see if they are interested in a

collaborative project.

If we fail at this, we will release the federal dollars.

But, at

this point, we don’t know.

We don’t expect more GRF, but rather a cut.

The July

numbers for tax revenues and “Cash for Clunkers” were good.

OBM is watching

revenues very closely.

Commissioner Daugherty asked, in addition to the $5 million, what are the other

soft points in the budget?

CFO Hansen responded there are a lot of unknowns--

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 3

from BWC funding to the Pathways participants.

We would like to project these

sources of funds will continue but are not sure due to the economy.

Board of

Regent’s dollars may also be cut, so the budget numbers are precarious.

CFO Hansen reported on the FFY 10 Uses of Funds.

She stated VR payroll is

reduced to reflect the impact of ERI and Cost Savings Days.

Payroll is

decreasing.

She further reported the VR case services are reduced to reflect

projected expenditures based on staffing levels.

Commissioner Daugherty

asked will the VR expenditure line 10 go away in FFY 11?

CFO Hansen

responded Line 10 shows an increase but that is due to stimulus dollars coming

in.

Pathways will increase as VR decreases.

Commissioner Daugherty asked why did the Business Enterprise consultant line

go up so much?

BSVI Director Hanes responded, the consultant line increased

due to the contract with the Ohio Business Gateway system.

Mr. Tribbie was

asked to look into the Consultant line increase further and get back with the

Commissioners.

CFO Hansen reported the PCA program is being maintained at its current level.

Due to input we received from the Solidarity Conference, we kept funding the

same under this program.

CFO Hansen stated the Non-Title I Program Management reflects the proposed

indirect cost plan.

The Independent Living program reflects a reduction in GRF

due to the biennial budget cuts.

CFO Hansen reported the BDD budget reflects increases for additional

adjudicators and support staff.

The Program Management budget is taken from

the indirect cost proposal submitted to the Department of Education.

Commissioner Growick asked if the In-Service Training Grant is from RSA.

BSVI

Director Hanes responded, yes, RSC uses these training dollars for staff training

for different topics such as substance abuse, etc.

We also work with TACE, the

Region V provider for training for Pathways providers.

CFO Hansen reported on the Program Management budget.

She stated the

Program Management budget reflects reductions in projected payroll and ERI

costs.

Administrator Rench stated regarding Program Management indirect

costs, Commissioners will notice an increase due to the move to the 150

building.

Staff will be located on the first and third floors of 150.

There may be

additional costs due to this move.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 4

CFO Hansen stated she would like to put a caveat on the budget presentation as

follows:

the budget is based upon our best estimates at the time of its

development and is subject to change based on the current economic

circumstances and office restructuring.

Commissioner Growick moved that the Budget and Audit Committee recommend

to the full Commission approval of the draft FFY 10 RSC budget as prepared and

presented by the RSC Executive staff, seconded by Commissioner Romer-

Senksy.

Motion carried.

Stimulus Update

Acting IT Team Leader Sherick reported on the VR Case Management System.

He stated IT is currently pursuing two options relating to case management and

eliminated a third.

The one option that was eliminated was to design a new

system from scratch.

Due to cost, staff and resources, this was not an option.

The two other options IT and VR are pursuing are purchase off-the-shelf product

or enhance the current OSCAR system and make it web-based.

He stated the

off-the-shelf product is the preferred option.

An RFP will take six to nine months,

which is too long to wait.

He has communicated his concerns with OIT.

OIT is

ready to dedicate resources as needed to make this a three to four month RFP

process.

He has a meeting scheduled with OIT next Friday to discuss the pros

and cons.

He has authority to go to the Controlling Board.

He is hoping that by

early next week RSC staff will get together and make a decision for the RFP for

Controlling Board or upgrade our current system to make it web-based.

Administrator Rench stated we have to be careful to protect the organization in

the use of stimulus dollars as well as monitoring this and being accountable.

This is why we are looking at the RFP.

We want to protect the organization from

any challenges, because it is a very expensive project for the provider.

Depending on what OIT says, our goal is to be ready by the first of the year.

We

are trying to be very careful as we go forward.

Stimulus dollars make it more

challenging.

Commissioner Growick stated RSC has engaged a special consultant to give us

feedback on IT.

Is the consultant done and do you have his recommendations?

Administrator Rench responded, the IT consultant is not part of this project.

He

is looking at the entire IT system, capacity, and resources.

There are multiple

challenges on BDD side.

The IT consultant is looking at entire capacity issues.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 5

Commissioner Growick asked, if we do go the RFP route, does that mean the

prior proposers will also have to submit an RFP?

Mr. Sherick responded, yes,

because the last two RFPs were not awarded to anyone; thus the third RFP can

be awarded to anyone.

Commissioner Growick asked, has anyone been looking at other state agencies

and private companies or RSA to see what they have out there?

Have we

received any feedback?

IT Acting Team Leader Sherick responded there are

roughly 25 states that use off-the-shelf products.

Commissioner Growick asked

can we partner with them so we don’t reinvent the wheel?

IT Acting Team

Leader Sherick responded, we have looked at the timing with other states.

Other

states are in different stages.

He is not aware that we have the ability to partner

with other states.

Commissioner Growick stated regarding web-based, can we take what we have

and make it web-based.

How viable is this?

This is a major transformation.

There are major risks associated with doing this.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated she supports the RFP.

But relying on

outside entities can slow us down.

The more we stress to OIT on Friday this is a

make it or break deal it for us.

This is our future.

Acting IT Team Leader Sherick

agreed.

Commissioner Daugherty asked, what is your gut feeling on the laundry list of

items you outlined, is it really doable including the Medicaid issue?

IT Acting

Team Leader Sherick responded that Medicaid would not be incorporated into

this proposal.

Mr. Sherick further stated, the laundry list of items is customized.

The Bureaus are willing to adapt to a product and help towards changing our

business process.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked, regarding the Pathways Model, the MH

system is modeled after RSC’s system.

Will we use different Pathways providers

for input as well as our own staff so this is seamless to users and does not cause

problems for Pathways?

Commissioner Daugherty asked, if you go with vendors that have other contracts

with other states, can this be part of the RFP?

If down the road (say, one-two

years) a new vendor comes up and wants to tweak it, is it possible?

IT Acting

Team Leader Sherick responded, yes, if a function is needed across the board,

then the vendor will develop this in their next release and yes we can take

advantage of this capability.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 6

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated, when purchasing off-the-shelf from a

vendor, the vendor supports the day-to-day project once we own it or do they

support it?

IT Acting Team Leader Sherick responded, it’s a mixture of both.

We

have three options:

1. vendors do all the support and fixes; or 2. RSC can do all

the support and fixes, or 3. there can be a middle ground and have a mixture of

both.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked, having a mixture of both, what if something

went wrong with vendor?

Would we still have the ability to support the product

and web application?

IT Acting Team Leader Sherick responded basically we

are purchasing the rights to own this.

Impact of GRF Cuts on CCDs and TBI

CFO Hansen indicated that this issue is on the agenda as a result of questions

raised by Commissioner Romer-Sensky at the last Commission meeting

regarding the impact of the GRF cuts on certain programs—specifically TBI and

CCDs.

Traumatic Brain Injury

CFO Hansen reported there are a couple of pieces to the TBI funding.

Brain

Injury receives VR Section 110 dollars via an Information & Referral Grant which

requires GRF match.

TBI also receives a Health Resources and Services

Administration (HRSA) grant that requires match.

This year, the federal HRSA

grant doubled in size, so the match requirement increased while the GRF

available for match decreased.

We have been working with the TBI to identify in-

kind contributions that can help fill the void so that TBI can match the entire

HRSA grant.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked, is there any SSR money left?

CFO

Hansen responded, SSR money cannot be used for matching the TBI grants

since SSR is federal money.

Fiscal Officer Protsman stated SSR money has not

historically been used for this.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated we need to

try to make them wholly funded.

VR Assistant Director Martinez stated we had $26,000 set aside for a TBI needs

assessment.

We eliminated that line and intend to cover the needs assessment

in a broader needs assessment for VR.

We also adjusted the grant.

We are

providing more of the match with in-kind contributions.

TBI cuts have been in

community service networks.

We wanted to expand this because services aren’t

available in all counties.

We will be able to meet the commitments under the

HRSA grant.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 7

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated the demand in the TBI area is going up.

Is

TBI seeing more people in need?

Assistant Director Martinez stated she can’t

answer that question, but the big issue is with returning veterans.

Under the

HRSA grant, veterans are one of their targeted populations.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated we need to look at carryover.

This bothers

her with veterans coming home with head injuries.

Do we have the ability to

backfill all or part of the GRF cut?

Commissioner Growick stated he empathizes with Commissioner Romer-

Sensky’s concerns.

There are a lot of returning veterans.

This could also lead

us to Title 31 – VA program.

Also the Governor has established a veteran’s

affairs office and from a programmatic standpoint we can reach out to them in

some way.

Similar to how we reached out to BOR and get cash transfers from

them to facilitate delivery of services better.

TBI does a great job, but the cut is

not helpful.

As an agency we can impact them.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky

stated she can support this.

Community Centers for the Deaf (CCD)

CFO Hansen reported every GRF line item is at a 30% reduction, including the

CCDs.

We do provide $750,000 in SSR monies to the CCDs in the FFY’10

budget.

Commissioners Daugherty, Romer-Sensky and Young agreed that RSC needs to

find a way to make the CCDs funding whole.

CFO Hansen stated we can have

dialogue with CCDs and then come back to the Budget and Audit Committee with

a recommendation.

FFY 10 VR State Plan

VR Assistant Director Martinez stated regarding Administrator’s Rench’s request

to make sure RSC has construction language in our state plan, she looked at the

Federal Code and mirrored that language and placed it in the State Plan so that

RSC would have an open door in case we want to implement.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated is this fairly routine in other states, that

other states use construction?

Administrator Rench responded it’s been 15-20

years ago that we did put funding into building structures, establishment grants.

As far as other states, periodically, other states have used this.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked, do you perceive any downside to this?

Administrator Rench responded we just want the ability to possibly do something

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 8

like this in our State Plan.

First, we will do a needs assessment. If this fits, then

we would put it in our overall strategic approach.

But since Ms. Martinez was

preparing the State Plan, we wanted to put this information in the Plan.

We are

looking at two state schools.

Commissioner Daugherty stated, please provide

this same flexibility to the CRPs.

He further stated there are a variety of ways

that states have handled construction money.

Medicaid Update

BDD Director Johnson reported in Ohio, disability determination is performed by

two agencies, ODJFS and RSC.

She stated in July 2008 ODJFS initiated a

workgroup to determine the feasibility for consolidating the Medicaid Disability

Determination process with the federal process currently administered at RSC.

The workgroup developed a model that uses the existing process and

infrastructure of BDD to perform all state and federal disability determinations.

ODJFS and RSC agree that federal funds can not be used to do non-federal

funding.

The workgroup is working on the development of several different

models for funding.

Discussions have included that ODJFS would be

responsible for all start up costs and would need to provide “seed money” to start

the program.

All costs are estimated and documents are in draft formats.

She

further stated it is difficult to determine the costs associated with computer

system development, software and hardware, since specifics are unknown.

The

process is to begin July 1, 2010.

The IT portion will take SSA a little while to look

at.

We drafted the IT portion of the plan and sent to JFS and to the Governor’s

Office for review, then on to SSA.

We are continuing to have discussions on this.

Commissioner Daugherty asked, where is the Governor’s Office on combining

these two systems?

Administrator Rench responded, the Governor’s Office is

supportive and would like to see this go forward.

The Governor’s Office is

holding meetings and pushing us to get issues resolved.

The current Medicaid

Director has resigned and the Acting Director may not remain in the position.

It

might slow down the process a bit due to these changes.

However, we are still

shooting for the July 2010 date.

Commissioner Daugherty asked, would the Governor’s Office make resources

available to do it?

Administrator Rench responded, we should not make that

assumption.

Medicaid wants a zero-cost option.

Medicaid wants anyone

applying for both SSI and Medicaid to have no cost to Medicaid.

Medicaid only

wants to pay for those who are applying for Medicaid only.

This is why the

number is so high.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24 2009

Page 9

BDD Director Johnson stated, even if the case overlaps with BDD and Medicaid,

we still have to have someone go in and look at the case, fill in information and

analyze it.

Commissioner Daugherty asked, what is the status?

BDD Director Johnson

replied, they want it to start July 1, 2010 – there is a lot of work to do between

now and then.

Administrator Rench stated there are two factors involved in this.

The first is, President Obama hasn’t reached as far down in placing people.

The

second is, the State is gearing up for medical information exchange using

stimulus dollars.

We are way ahead of this in Ohio.

This streamlines everything.

He further stated he has had some discussion at Governor’s level to talk about

this.

One of the costs that has not been resolved is Medicaid gets free medical

information, BDD does not.

This is going to happen – but by July 1, 2010,

probably not.

BDD Director Johnson stated a meeting is being planned with the counties on

September 2

nd

and SSA and CMS have been invited to attend.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky asked, when Medicaid is estimating costs, does

this include any component of counties?

She also asked, are the JFS counties

still responsible for Medicaid and is this coming out of their county allocation or

are they assuming we are paying them?

Also, how does this fit with counties

cutting their workforce?

We are now picking up county costs.

Simultaneously -

is this new JFS rules that if someone applies with Medicaid do you automatically

apply for SS?

Are there any downsides?

Not sure if the feds will like this or not.

This may be a little harder to make happen.

Do you feel the IT architecture is

robust enough to handle the additional caseload besides any applications

change?

Do you anticipate any JFS employees who do processing, transferring

over to BDD or are we hiring a new class?

Administrator Rench responded a lot

of work has to happen on the JFS side.

They haven’t done some of this work.

They are absorbing all costs in their staff.

They have begun discussions with

county staff.

They are taking dollars away from the county.

A lot of these

questions haven’t been answered by JFS.

Commissioner Romer-Sensky stated counties do a major component in this

process.

We are beyond updating this.

It makes sense to bring the two systems

together, but it is very complex.

BDD Director Johnson stated in terms of costs, JFS had a hard time separating

this out.

For example, who would pay counties to do intake?

Commissioner

Romer-Sensky stated we need to put this in writing.

Budget and Audit Committee

August 24, 2009

Page 10

BDD Director Johnson stated the counties will save time, BDD gathers evidence.

Whether they maintain their current budget, have simultaneous applications, we

need to list items JFS would be responsible for.

We would normally have 90

days to process a case, but in reality, we have 60 days under the combined

process, because the county needs 30 days to process applications.

Ms.

Johnson further stated it is not our intent to transfer JFS employees here.

In

addition JFS has held several subgroup meetings with counties, but no RSC

employees were invited to these meetings.

Public Comment

OARF Executive Director Keil stated in the 2010 budget as presented, she

doesn’t see the BMV revenue for donations associated with the purchases of

handicapped license placards.

Even though OARF doesn’t know the amount of

money it would generate, the Legislative Services Commission created a

separate funding account for this.

Ms. Keil asked, are there any discussions

going on between RSC and BMV to carry this out?

Administrator Rench

responded, no.

CFO Hansen stated at the time of the legislation, there was no

dollar figure associated with it; however, it was estimated that the dollar amount

would be minimal for budgeting purposes.

Next Meeting

Commissioner Daugherty stated the next Budget and Audit Committee Meeting

is scheduled on October 21, 2009.

Note:

Meeting date has been subsequently adjusted to October 22, 2009.

Adjourn

At 11:00 a.m. Commissioner Growick moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded

by Commissioner Romer-Sensky.

Motion carried.