Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission of the Virginia General Assembly

Interbase Software Corp. Technical Publications

Description

Secretary of Health and Human Resources The Design And Implementation Virginia’sComprehensive Services ActBriefing for Commission on Revision of Virginia'sState Tax CodeAugust 18th, 20032 Problems Leading To Development of CSA How CSA Works And Who It Serves Early Study Findings and CurrentExpenditure Trends Status of Secretary’s Action Plan3 Prior to the enactment of CSA, treatment services for troubled children werepaid for through six different funding streams across four State agencies: Department of Education (DOE) Department of Social Services (DSS) Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance AbuseServices (DMHMRSAS) Problems associated with the delivery of services through this fragmentedsystem included: Service duplication --14,000 cases across four agencies were found torepresent no more than 5,000 children Unequal access to care fueled by differences in the local match rates Reliance on more expensive forms of care also caused, in part, bydifferences in local match rates Program expenditures rates that grew annually by approximately 22 percent4 Upon enacting CSA, the General Assemblyestablished several program goals. Includedamong these were: provision of services to at-risk children in the leastrestrictive environment possible promotion of early intervention with children and theirfamilies who are at-risk of developing emotional andbehavior ...

Informations

• Publié par: Suib
• Nombre de lectures: 24
• Langue: English

Extrait

Secretary of Health and Human Resources

 The Design And Implementation Virginias Comprehensive Services Act

Briefing for Commission on Revision of Virginia's State Tax Code

August 18th, 2003

A skW dnI oheS t SA C owHSA Cor W F niidgn sna duC rves Early Study o sutatS tenrr P alitno

2

    P   r



ncretf Ses Acary



Expenditure Trends



T gnidaeL smelbooft enpmloveDeo 

   eamgrro  Petar serutidnepx shttag er wnaunally by approximleta22 yrep tnec

 Unequal access to care fueled by differences in the local match rates

 Service duplication --14,000 cases across four agencies were found to represent no more than 5,000 children

 Reliance on more expensive forms of care also caused, in part, by differences in local match rates

Prior to the enactment of CSA, treatment services for troubled children were paid for through six different funding streams across four State agencies:

 Department of Education (DOE)

Problems associated with the delivery of services through this fragmented system included:

3

 Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Services (DMHMRSAS)

 Department of Social Services (DSS)

 Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)



Upon enacting CSA, the General Assembly established several program goals. Included among these were:

 provision of services to at-risk children in the least restrictive environment possible

 promotion of early intervention with children and their families who are at-risk of developing emotional and behavior problems

 increase interagency collaboration and family involvement in CSA service planning and delivery

 provide localities with the needed flexibility to implement and monitor CSA

4

ska dnW C ASW ro CSA ow ment of veD polenidaoT gemblLes roP n

5



     H

Expenditure Trends





yarAcs ontila PtatSo sueS fterc  duC snatrrnedytu Slyngdiin F eS tI oh raE sevr

T owT-eier dtSta 6 AutcuW er sE sa lbat Mae genantmetr S  yeDlocimpneevold Toishede P Gui eL etatSlev CSr Fot  e Tht  A A mmocadneciloeR yEC S  -     ontitos  rTiaingnD-segi nhnical   and Tec f ecnatsissA    nmerov Galoc Lor nest T dn2Respier bilionsi   :    itse ekP --aM

  Membership basically mirrors SEC

State And Local Advisory Team

Office of Comprehensive Services

1st Tier Responsibilitie  s:  --Develop Policy  --Provide Oversight

Membership   : Parent Representative Private Provider 2 Local A  R ge e n pr c e y s  H en e t a a d ti s v  f e r s om:  DMHMRSAS DSS DJJ DOE DOH Supreme Court DMAS

State Executive Council

The Local Structure For CSA Mirrors the State Level Structure 7

1st Tier Responsibilities:    --Fiscal Agent  --Policy Development  --Organize Family Assessment  Planning Teams

2nd Tier Responsibilities:    --Conduct Assessments  -Determine Client Eligibility -  --Develop Service Plans  Recommend Plans to CPMT --

Community Policy and Management Team

Family Assessment Planning Team

Membership:   Local Agency Heads from: DSS CSBs Health Department Juvenile Court Local School Division Parents Private Provider

Membership:   DSS Staff CSB Staff Health Department Staff Juvenile Court Staff Local School Division Staff Parents Private Provider

Elig 8 mse ProblereveS htiW nerdlhi CTo esrcoues RegstT raC ASF roeriaCritity ibil

 place the child in imminent risk of residential care

 require resources that are beyond the scope of normal agency services; or

 are significantly disabling and present in several settings

 are persistent or critical in nature

 CSA is mostly reserved for children who have behavior or emotional problems that either:





Children who qualify for CSA based on their emotional or behavior problems are then considered either mandated or non-mandated  for CSA-funded treatment services

Services needed by mandated youth are funded sum sufficiently. This group consists of:

 special education students who are to be enrolled in private schools

 children in foster homes

9

01 ewviReA : ceurSoeherpmoC ehT fo rvices Ansive Se( LJRA)Ctc ,9189

86 percent

 Living With One Parent

32 percent

21 percent

 Lack of Impulse Control

 Oppositional/Defiant

 Sexually Abused

 Receiving Psychotropic Drugs

 At Least One Parent On Drugs

56 percent

55 percent

45 percent

74 percent

41 percent

47 percent

CSA Children Have Multiple Problems

 Child Abused Prior To CSA

 Emotional Problems

 Conduct Disorder

PTo Devel

 

o



p



m

Expenditure Trends

en



t oorlbme seLdani g  tI ohW dna skro WSA Cow H ACSf  na dgn sniidydF  Stuarly es E Serv tSsuta rrCuten aln   

11

cAitnoP etarys  of Secr