Model State Plan and Organizational Standards

Transcription

1 Model State Plan and Organizational Standards July 27, 2015; 2:00 3:30 pm ET Presenters 2 Services Programs (NASCSP) Jenae Bjelland, Executive Director Office of Community Services (OCS) Jeannie Chaffin, Director Community Action Program Legal Services (CAPLAW) Eleanor Evans, Executive Director and General Counsel Community Action Partnership (CAP) Denise Harlow, Chief Executive Officer Jarle Crocker, Director of Training and Technical Assistance Services Programs 1

2 Agenda 3 Introductions Overview of Purpose Resources Available Big Picture State Examples Pennsylvania, California, Iowa, West Virginia peers Q&A CSBG Performance Management Framework Driving Continuous Program Improvement ORGANIZATIONAL STANDARDS (Capacity) Developed by the Organizational Standards Center of Excellence (COE) with key stakeholders. Ensures CSBG-eligible entities have appropriate organizational capacity to serve low-income families and communities Assessed at State and local levels; reported to OCS in State Plans and Annual Reports. Draft IM: issued March 24, 2014 Final IM: January 26, 2015 FEDERAL / STATE ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES (Efficiency) Developed by Urban Institute with key stakeholders. Track State and Federal organizational performance; increase accountability and transparency. States report on measures in State Plans and Annual Reports; OCS reports on measures in reports to Congress. Draft Measures: issued Feb. 28, 2014 Draft IM: January 28, 2015 Final IM: expected summer 2015 MEASURES (ROMA NEXT GENERATION / NPIs) (Results) Developed by the ROMA Next Generation COE, building upon earlier National Performance Indicators (NPIs) Measures results / outcomes for low-income families and communities States will report on NPIs through Annual Reports. Draft IM & OMB clearance: initiated by summer 2015 Draft IM: expected Fall Services Programs 2

3 CSBG Organizational Standards for Eligible Entities 5 A comprehensive set of standards for assessing capacity of private nonprofit and public CSBG agencies (58 private / 50 public standards) Developed by the OCS-funded Center of Excellence, with extensive CSBG Network input Implementation tools: Revised Model State Plan and Annual Report IM 138: State Establishment of Organizational Standards for CSBG Eligible Entities: published 1/26/15 Implementation year: FY 2016 IM 138: State Establishment of Organizational Standards for CSBG Eligible Entities 6 Assessment of Standards, page 5 CSBG Lead Agency (State) is responsible for assessing eligible entities against standards and reporting results to OCS States may design their own assessment approach States must ensure assessment is independently verified by the State or a third party Services Programs 3

4 IM 138: Assessment of Standards 7 Example 1: Assess entities during triennial on-site monitoring. For entities not monitored in a given year, the entity does a self-assessment that is independently verified by a third party Example 2: Peer review assessment for all entities that is verified annually during State monitoring or a State desk review CSBG Model State Plan Section 6: Organizational Standards COE-standards or alternative standards? 6.2. Minor modifications of COE-standards, if any? 6.3. How will the state adopt standards in the state? 6.4. How will the state assess eligible entities against standards? 6.5. Will the state make exceptions in applying standards due to special circumstances? 6.6. In future years: What percentage of eligible entities does the state expect to meet standards? Services Programs 4

5 Section 6: Organizational Standards State Adoption How will the State officially adopt organizational standards (Select at least one) Regulation Policy Contracts with eligible entities Other, describe Section 6: Organizational Standards State Assessment Strategies How will the State assess eligible entities against organizational standards? (Select at least one) Peer-to-peer review (with validation by the State or Stateauthorized third party) Self-assessment (with validation by the State or Stateauthorized third party) Self-assessment/peer review with State risk analysis State-authorized third party validation Regular, on-site CSBG monitoring Other 6.4a. Describe the assessment process [narrative] Services Programs 5

6 Center of Excellence (COE)- developed CSBG Organizational Standards Tools for States Denise Harlow, CCAP Chief Executive Officer Jarle Crocker, PhD Director of Training and Technical Assistance This presentation was created by the National Association of Community Action Agencies Community Action Partnership, in the performance of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Community Services Grant Numbers, 90ET0434 and 90ET Any opinion, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. Current Assessment Tools Services Programs 6

7 EXISTING TOOLS 13 State assessment Private CEEs State Assessment Public CEEs DRAFT TOOLS IN DEVELOPMENT 14 ASSESSMENT Template TAP tracking Documenting Standard 4.3 QIP Tracking (*in progress, not yet ready) Services Programs 7

8 Assessment Template Includes: Introduction Sample Cover Letter Table by Frequency Sample Documentation Packet Table of Contents Services Programs 8

9 Sample Documentation Packet Identify documents used to demonstrate meeting Standard Noted portions referenced (highlighting, color codes, notes) Identify documents used for multiple Standards Identify documents that will not change prior to the next self-assessment or monitoring visit TAP Tracking Services Programs 9

10 Documenting Standard 4.3 Standard 4.3 The organization s Community Action plan and strategic plan document the continuous use of the full Results Oriented Management and Accountability (ROMA) cycle or comparable system (assessment, planning, implementation, achievement of results, and evaluation). In addition, the organization documents having used the services of a ROMA-certified trainer (or equivalent) to assist in implementation. Services Programs 10

11 Document continuous use Documents services of trainer QIP Tracking Sub-committee of Risk Mitigation T/TA Center s Steering Committee Developed prior to IM 138, will be re-visited Narrative plus simple tracking cover sheet Services Programs 11

12 CAPLAW Bylaws Toolkit (5.1, 5.3) 23 CAPLAW Tripartite Board Self-Training Tools (5.1) 24 Services Programs 12

13 CAPLAW Tools for Top-Notch CAAs (8.9, 8.7, 5.6, 7.7) 25 Some Other CAPLAW Resources Publications (for Bylaws Toolkit, Board Self-Training Tools, Tools for Top-Notch CAAs): Model Policies: Conflict of Interest (5.6) Whistleblower and Complaint Resolution (7.7) Record Retention Policy (8.13) Archived Webinars: Roadmap for Resolving CAA Conflicts of Interest (5.6) Whistleblower Policies (7.7) 26 Services Programs 13

14 Big Picture 27 MSP process and incorporating organizational standards requires: Strong state and state association partnerships Agency buy in and participation Innovation Tools and resources are available NASCSP, CAP, CAPLAW, OCS Your peers will be invaluable resource NASCSP Peer-To-Peers, CSBGTTA, upcoming CAP and NASCSP Conferences, webinars Big Picture 28 Key element = flexibility to innovate and implement based on unique context State peers today will share examples of innovation and strong leadership-led collaborations in response to MSP, organizational standards and other upcoming changes facing the Network. Services Programs 14

15 Your Peer Presenters 29 PENNSYLVANIA: Tom Rawlings, Chief, Department of Community & Economic Development technology, agency self-assessment and collaboration with state association IOWA: Bill Brand, Administrator, Division of Community Action Agencies, Department of Human Rights & Lana Shope, Executive Director, Iowa Community Action Association state and state association working together, strong assessment process CALIFORNIA: Pamela Harrison, Deputy Director, Community Services Division, California Department of Community Services and Development network engagement and agency buy-in WEST VIRGINIA: Shelly Woda, CSBG/MIS Program Manager, Office of Economic Opportunity computer-based assessment system State of Pennsylvania Tom Rawlings, Chief, Department of Community & Economic Development, PA Services Programs 15

16 AGENCY SELF-ASSESSMENT IN PENNSYLVANIA 31 Pennsylvania embarked upon an agency self-assessment process in order to implement organizational standards. A self-assessment tool based on the exact sections of the organizational standards was created as an extension of the current COPOS reporting system. The creation of the self-assessment tool was managed by Community Action, Inc. who holds the sole source contract to manage and develop COPOS. The PA state association as well as small groups of interested agencies were consulted as the tool was developed. AGENCY SELF-ASSESSMENT 32 The State CSBG Office as well as each agency receives a report of results with the Green (met) or Red (not met) areas. The COPOS system allows for each agency to update their status on any standard at any time. Each agency will receive monthly reports on their status. Services Programs 16

17 AGENCY SELF-ASSESSMENT 33 PA will fold the review of these standards and each agency s progress into the oversight and monitoring process. Moving ahead, we will need to understand federal timeframes or allowances for areas of the standards that are not met by agencies. State of Iowa Bill Brand, Administrator, Division of Community Action Agencies, Department of Human Rights Lana Shope, Executive Director, Iowa Community Action Association Services Programs 17

18 State of Iowa Process Frequent and valuable communication between state office, state association and CAAs Started conversation as standards were being developed Provided joint feedback to OCS regarding standards All agreed to participate in pilot project State and Association staff doing joint T&TA to CAAs and 2/3s of CAAs have been through full on-site review of standards Association providing ongoing TA to six agencies who will be monitored next year Annual training conference for the past two years focused on standards Key Elements of Assessment Process Regular on site assessment for six agencies State conducts review issues letter within 60 days TAP if necessary Have until Sept. 30 to comply Other eleven agencies complete self assessment with validation from state office CAAs do self assessment determining if met or not met If met, notes documentation If not met, includes action steps and timeline to comply Services Programs 18

19 Issues Needing Attention Timing OCS final approval of MSP Readiness of OLDC system Holding hearings Capacity State office - personnel, time, training, money CAAs - personnel, time, training, money State of California Pamela Harrison, Deputy Director, Community Services Division, California Department of Community Services and Development Services Programs 19

20 California Collaboration with CSBG Eligible Entities & State Association Participated in pilot of Organizational Standards Blog and post all communication related to organizational standards Present and update at quarterly CSBG Advisory Committee Meetings (CAC) Established page on CSD s providers website dedicated to Organizational Standards California Formed Organizational Standards Workgroup comprised of CSBG eligible entities and State Association representatives Scheduled and conducted mandatory Organizational Standards webinars Requested verification of Self Assessment certification signed by Executive Director and Board Chairperson Funded Training and Technical Assistance Services Programs 20

21 California Assessment Process On-site monitoring Desk reviews Evaluation of self assessments Assessment Results Implementation plan Technical Assistance plan Quality Improvement plan State of West Virginia Shelly Woda, CSBG/MIS Program Manager, Office of Economic Opportunity, WV Services Programs 21

22 WV ELECTRONIC SELF-ASSESSMENT Process and Timing for an Effective Roll-out April 22, 2015 Webinar: Organizational Standards (How to Complete Your Self-Assessment) This webinar will provide eligible entities with the tools and information needed to complete an organizational standards electronic self-assessment in FACS Pro. A recording of this webinar will be available on OEO Website within 5 days. April 22, 2015 Electronic Self-Assessment Tool Release: The electronic Self-Assessment tool will be made available to eligible entities in DBA FACS Pro OS Pro. Eligible entities are encouraged to begin their electronic self-assessment as soon as possible. April 22, 2015 Draft Document Release: CSBG IM Implementation of Organizational Standards for CSBG Eligible Entities April 22, 2015 May 29, 2015 Comment Period: OEO will be accepting comments in writing from boards and leadership of eligible entities on the Draft CSBG IM All comments will be considered and discussed among OEO staff to determine the best response and/or possible modifications to the Draft IM. June 30, 3015 Final Document Release: CSBG IM Implementation of Organizational Standards for CSBG Eligible Entities 43 Process and Timing for an Effective Roll-out, cont. September 30, 2015 Initial Self-Assessment Due: Eligible entities must have completed an initial electronic self-assessment in FACS Pro OS Pro. September 1, 2015 FY 2016 CSBG Application and State Plan: States are expected to use organizational standards for assessing eligible entities starting in FY In order to do this, OEO must include information about organizational standards in their FY 2016 application and State plan. October 1, 2015 March 31, 2016 Review and Analysis Period: Together, the WV Community Action Partnership and OEO will evaluate the status of each organizational standard to determine common areas where improvement is needed. This will create areas of focus for planned training and technical assistance in FY 2016 including topics at the 2016 WVCAP Annual Training Conference. The initial selfassessment will not result in any QIPs for eligible entities. April 1, 2016 September 30, 2016 Period to Complete Baseline Assessments: During this period, eligible entities will be required to complete an electronic self-assessment that will be verified by OEO or a third party. This assessment will be reported to OCS in the CSBG Annual Report as required in OCS IM 138. This assessment will establish a baseline by which all future activities and changes in the status of meeting each standard will be measured. Following the baseline assessment, eligible entities will update assessments no less than annually. Assessment will be reviewed by OEO or a third party 44 Services Programs 22

23 Services Programs 23

24 47 48 Q&A! Visit for more resources and information. Services Programs 24