|
Minutes of other Meetings |
Minutes of the Board of Supervisors
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
5:30 P.M. 
CALL TO ORDER Chairman Harper called the March 10, 2009 meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:30 p.m. Mr. Wright led the invocation. Mr. Harper said he would like to add a resolution in support of VDOT abandonment of a 30 foot easement on primary Route 208 (New Bridge Road). Mr. Harper said he would like add a closed session to the agenda.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Byers, which carried by a vote of 6-0, with Mr. Barnes being absent, the March 10, 2009 agenda was adopted as amended. PRESENTATIONS Mr. Nichols read through the following slides; - Costs increasing 22% annually in residential services (for foster care & special education youth mandated sum sufficient by law) - Annual state shortfalls (additional $14 million in FY 1990) - Complex funding structure 14 categorical funding streams - Over 14,000 children across 4 child serving agencies - 4,993 children - Over 80% involved with 2 or more agencies for residential services (social services, schools, court services units, community services boards) - 31% with 3 agencies - 19% with 4 agencies - 89% emotional and/or behavioral problems - 77% significant problems in school suspended, expelled, truant, drop out - 50% problems with alcohol or substance abuse Characteristics of Systems of Care Reforms - Child-centered, family-focused, community-based & cost-effective Preserve & strengthen families - Enable children to remain in homes, schools & communities whenever possible - Provide services in least restrictive environment appropriately meets needs - Protect welfare of children & maintain public safety CSA System of Care Approach - Provide services that respond to strengths and needs of children & their families - Increase family involvement & interagency collaboration - Encourage public/private partnership in service delivery Pool funds & allocate to community teams - Consolidate categorical funding across agencies - Place authority & accountability for funding/service decisions with community teams - Provide communities flexible funds to purchase public/private services - Maintain each agencys responsibility for normal services Who is served under CSA? - 18,195 children served in FY08 - Demographics ¨ Average age: 12 years 8 months ¨ 60% male; 40% female ¨ 53% Caucasian; 41% African American; 5% unknown ¨ 4% Hispanic
- Primary reasons for services ¨ 35% due to caregiver neglect, physical abuse, incapacity/absence ¨ 17% for behavioral problems ¨ 16% for special education issues ¨ 16% for emotional, mental health, or substance abuse problems ¨ 5% court involvement ¨ 2% truancy ¨ 9% other How are youth referred to CSA? - Children enter the system through different doors ¨ Local social services (61%) ¨ Schools (23%) ¨ Court service units (7%) ¨ Community service boards (4%) ¨ Other (5%) What are the needs of CSA Children & Families? - Safety from abuse & neglect - Stable & permanent homes - Safely residing in community - Effective parenting skills - School attendance - Social & peer supports - Behavioral & emotional problem management - Substance abuse treatment - Independent living skills What Community Services are Provided In Home & School? - Comprehensive assessments - Crisis intervention & stabilization services - Natural family/community supports - Short-term emergency necessities - Family support/education - Respite care - Specialized treatment services - Intensive in-home services - Behavioral aides - School-based services - After school services - Supervised social/recreational services - Mentoring - Individual, group, family therapy - Substance abuse services Community Services (continued) - Therapeutic day treatment - Vocational services - Independent living services - Medical management - Care coordination
- FY08 Average Expenditures by Service Placement Type Sorted by Average Expenditures per Child
What are the drivers of CSA expenditures? - Costs driven by multiple factors, some beyond state & local control ¨ Number of mandated children in community ¨ Severity of problems ¨ Availability, type & duration of services ¨ Service rates ¨ Availability of alternative funding sources ¨ Local practices ¨ Policy changes - Cost of one child or family can unexpectedly place significant strain on a communitys budget. - Federal and state policy changes show trend to shift costs to local governments - Local service gaps can lead to increased utilization of more intensive services What are the core beliefs that drive our outcomes? - Childcentered, family-focused, community based care - A safe environment
- A system that engages families in the process - Serving children in family settings - Services that support permanent family connections - A system based on collaborative partnerships What are desired state outcomes? - Increase proportion of children served in homes, schools & communities ¨ 38.4% of children in FY05 ¨ 41.7% in FY06 ¨ 40.9% in FY07 ¨ 40.1% in FY08 - Decrease percentage of children who are in residential care ¨ 25% in FY05 ¨ 25% in FY06 ¨ 23.3% in FY07 ¨ 23.7% in FY08 - Decrease percentage of CSA expenditures on residential care ¨ 46.9% in FY05 ($128.1 of $273.2 million) ¨ 45% in FY06 ($132.6 of $295 million) ¨ 42.4% in FY07 ($145.3 of $342.2 million) ¨ 39.9% in FY08 ($155.2 of $388.6 million) How do communities implement the CSA? - Community Policy & Management Team (CPMT) - Coordinate long range community wide planning - Establish a multidisciplinary services planning team (FAPT) - Manage policies governing referrals and service provision - Provide quality assurance of program and fiscal utilization - Family Assessment & Planning Team (FAPT) ¨ Provide strength based assessments of children & families ¨ Pool resources of local knowledge to provide individualized plans ¨ Provide ongoing review of plans to adjust services for effective outcomes Family Assessment & Planning Team - Members of the FAPT are appointed by the Community Policy & Management Team. They include: - Required representatives: Community Services Board, Department of Social Services, Juvenile Court Service Unit, Parent Representative, and SchooL Representative. - They often include members of the Health Department, Private Providers, and other Community members. Family Assessment & Planning Teams Responsibilities - Pool together their professional knowledge & skills as well as resources of their agencies - Engage the child & family as partners - Assess the strengths and needs of children & their families - Build upon family strengths & community supports - Develop an individualized plan that creatively tailors services & supports to meet needs Community Policy & Management Teams (CPMTs) - Ensure decision making and oversight policies are effective - Oversee program evaluation and quality assurance - Develop clear procedures for care coordination and utilization management - Pool resources to maximize the use of funds across agencies - Promote a culture of collaboration among stakeholders Current strategies for strengthening the CSA - Through the Childrens Service Systems Transformation, build a statewide system of regional collaborative to: ¨ Provide enhanced resources for foster care recruitment & retention ¨ Provide technical assistance and tools to develop community based services capacity - Improve utilization management functions ¨ Statewide roll-out of Intensive Care Coordination services ¨ Local strengthening of fiscal and utilization review functions - Improve child-specific assessment and planning ¨ Implementation of CANS (Virginia Child & Adolescent Needs and Strengths Assessment)
Data Observations on Louisa County - Demographics: ¨ Growth in mandated CSA census across categories with largest growth among white male 7 12 year olds - Expenditure Increases: ¨ Largest areas of growth in: - Non-Title IV-E Therapeutic Foster Homes and Congregate Care placements and - Special Education Day placements - Service Array: ¨ There appears to be little use of CSA funds for school based services to prevent out of school placements - Top Reasons for Referral: ¨ Neglect, Behavioral Issues, Court Involvement, Caregiver Incapacity and Emotional Issues
Data Observations on Louisa County
Data Observations on Louisa County
Benefits of Collaborative CSA System - Improves decision-making - Improves outcomes for children & families - Provides families, schools & communities support needed - Allows more children to stay in homes, schools & communities - Uses resources wisely Resources for Information - The CSA Website at www.csa.virginia.gov contains a variety of resources, including training opportunities, statistical reports and profiles and the CSA Code. - Information concerning the Virginia Childrens Service System Transformation can be found at: www.vafamilyconnections.com - The CSA Manual may be accessed on the website or at: www.csa.state.va.us/html/manual_pubs/pubs_manual.cfm - General questions concerning CSA can be directed to David Nichols, Technical Assistance Coordinator at (804) 662-7451 or david.nichols@csa.virginia.gov.
Mr. Havasy asked of the 63,000 per child how much of it was administrative. Mr. Nichols said most administrative cost were funded locally. • Acknowledgements • Terminology • Reason for the Study • Study Goals • Study Methods • Study Outcomes • Louisa County CSA Strengths • Causes/Needs Improvement Areas • Solutions/Recommendations
Acknowledgements • Study Advisory Team (SAT) • Louisa County • Office of Comprehensive Services (OCS) • Charlottesville/Albemarle CCF • Fluvanna County • Hampton
Reasons for CSA Study • Rising Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) costs • Expanding Foster Care and CSA Caseloads • Limited Evaluation, Planning, and Resource Development • Successful Studies by Other Communities • State Requirements and Expectations • Desire to Reduce Costs and Improve Efficiency • Better Serve Louisa County Children/Families
• Identify causes of rising CSA costs • Review the efficiency of the existing LC CSA system Strengths/Needs Improvements • Establish a 5 year trends approach to data collection, evaluation, and planning Mr. Gallagher said he only got 1/3 of the data he asked for. • Encourage a more active public/private agency and governmental partnership • Provide recommendations for reducing costs and improving service delivery Mr. Gallagher said they used the following methods to establish the study; • Establish a Study Advisory Team (SAT) • Observe LC CSA System FAPT/CPMT • Review Louisa County Statistics • Conduct an Anonymous Staff Survey • Interview CSA and Interagency Staff • Individual Case Reviews • Visit to Hampton Systems of Care • Final Report and Presentation Ms. Bright said there was a lot more background history put into the case review, it didnt start where the case review started. • Experienced/Caring Staff 75% 11+ 55% 21+ • Positive Relationships FAPT/CPMT • Creative Individual Family Services Plans • Self Examination Initiative (Paul, LC, and SAT) • Improvements in CSA FAPT Scheduling • Foster Homes 6 in 2002 26 in 2008 • Improved Focus on Cost Containment • Study Advisory Team/Board of Supervisors Mr. Gallagher said the following were some of the causes of CSA cost increases; • Lack of Local Services and Resources • Lack of Awareness of Local Services 72% Not Aware of Local Services • Significant Increases in CSA and Foster Care Caseloads (Agency Overloads) • Inadequate Evaluation and Planning Mr. Gallagher said he didnt think there were enough people and too much work was being contracted out. Mr. Gallagher said he would recommend a study to do a cost analysis if the county were to hire someone or contract the position out and play out the cost. Mr. Gallagher said everybody was talking about change, but no one was taking the lead to do it. • Lack of Specialized Foster Homes • Cost Shifts Federal State Local • Older Teens/More Difficult To Serve Children and Families 46% 2008 CSA • FAPT/CPMT Decision Making/Process Mr. Gallagher said the county spent money on him to do a study on a specialized Foster Care Program. Mr. Gallagher said he did a study on an electronic file two years ago and the county doesnt have any specialized foster homes. • Coordinate Long Range Community Planning • Establish a Multi-Discipline Services Planning • Team (FAPT) • Manage Polices Regarding Referrals and Service • Provision • Provide Quality Assurance of Program and Fiscal • Utilization FAPT • Provide Strengths Based Assessments Mr. Gallagher said following list were causes of CSA cost increases; • Inconsistent Pre CSA Decision Making • Louisa County Population Increases 14% • Louisa County Match Rate 44% • Limited Family Ownership/Involvement • Inadequate CSA Training 63% Unsatisfactory Orientation • Hire a F/T Family Services Coordinator (FSC) Mr. Gallagher said if he had only one recommendation it would be to hire a FSC and the position would report to the County Administrator. The position would be equal to a Department Head and would be able to move the system along. • Redefine FAPT/CPMT Roles & Process Mr. Gallagher said the data needed to be kept and someone needed to keep up with it. Mr. Gallagher said the agencies should give some outcome data. • Document Evaluation and Planning Efforts Mr. Gallagher said the Family Services Coordinator would do the following; • Develop and Maintain LC Family Services Guide • Oversees 5 Year Trends and Statistics Process • Chair FAPT/CPMT & Annual Planning Retreats • Case Reviews/Cost Containment Planning • Facilitate Family Services Council (SAT) • Grant Writing and Project Development • Annual Report to BOS (Strengths/Needs) • Coordinate with all LC Youth/Family Services • Keep Locality Informed on State Youth Initiatives • System Evaluation/Planning/Recordkeeping Solutions/Recommendations continued • Develop a Web Based Family Services Guide
• Develop Pre CSA Checklist/Cost Containment 4. Improve Staff Training, Support, and Acknowledgement • Develop an Interagency Training Manual/Video • Define Role of FS Coordinator • Explore Funding Options • Hire FS Coordinator • Identify Services Continuum (and Gaps) • Redefine FAPT and CPMT Roles • Establish Family Services Council • Explore Truancy Position/Day Treatment • Invest in Foster Care Prevention Mr. Gallagher said the county would be getting a work plan from him in the two weeks. Resolution In support of VDOT Abandonment of a 30 foot easement on primary Route 208 (New Bridge Road)
Mr. Gentry explained his handout on the abandonment. On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which was carried by vote of 5-0, with Messers Barnes and Wright being absent, the Board adopted a resolution in support of VDOT abandonment of a 30 foot easement on primary Route 208 (New Bridge Road).
CLOSED SESSION
On motion of Mr. Byers, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 5-0, with Messers Barnes and Wright being absent, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 8:28 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:
1. In accordance with §2.23711 (A) (1) VA Code Ann., for the purpose of discussion, consideration, or interviews of prospective candidates for employment; assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining, or resignation of specific public officers, appointees, or employees of any public body; and evaluation of performance of departments where such evaluation will necessarily involve discussion of the performance of specific individuals. REGULAR SESSION On motion of Mr. Byers, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 5-0, with Messers Barnes and Wright being absent, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 8:39 p.m.
RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION On motion of Mr. Byers, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 5-0, with Messers Barnes and Wright being absent, the Board voted to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Louisa County Board of Supervisors has convened a Closed Meeting this10th day of March 2009, pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, §2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with the Virginia Law.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED on this 10th day of March 2009, that the Louisa County Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting was heard, discussed or considered by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.
RECESS
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Byers, which carried by a vote of 5-0, the Board voted to recess the March 10, 2009 meeting at 8:40 p.m. until March 11, 2009 at 6:00 p.m.
BY ORDER OF |
