HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05211996 - C73 73
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS F&HS-01 �:._ . Contra
o .o
FROM: FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE �'✓�� Costa
_ 4o County
May 13, 1996 ;
DATE: s'A couK`�
SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE
FAMILY MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. ACCEPT the attached report from the Assistant to the Health Services
Director, outlining the status of the work on the Family Maintenance
Organization.
2. REQUEST the Health Services Director to provide the Family and Human
Services Committee with a further report on the status of the Family
Maintenance Organization when the cost study is sufficiently completed that
there is additional information to provide to our Committee, but no later than
December 9, 1996.
BACKGROUND:
Mary Foran, Assistant to the Health Services Director, reported on the activities of
the Family Maintenance Organization in the past three months. A copy of her report
is attached. Ms. Foran reviewed this report with us in some detail, emphasizing that
there will not be sufficient savings from health services alone to pay for the
preventive services. Thus, it is necessary to turn to other County programs to
identify possible savings in the Social Service and Probation Departments. This will
be the purpose of the cost study, which will attempt to identify the cost of services
provided by the Health Services, Social Service and Probation Departments in the
Bay Point area. The cost study will probably focus on not more than 200 families.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF B C M I TEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURESJTWSMITH
ACTION OF BOARD ON May 21, 1996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
_X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ----------- ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED May 21, 1996
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: County Administrator SU S SAND COUNTY ADMINISTRATO
Health Services Director -
BY
F&HS-01
We are all disappointed that we were unsuccessful in obtaining funding for the
Family Maintenance Organization from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Our Committee suggested that it might be important to at least try to identify whether
we could include in the cost study the costs of the public safety programs operated
by the County, including the law enforcement costs, District Attorney, Courts and
related costs, in addition to those for the Health Services, Social Service and
Probation Departments.
We have asked the Department to report back to our Committee in six months or
when there has been sufficient progress on the cost study that there may be some
useful information to report.
-2-
Contra Costa County
The Board of Supervisors HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
Jim Rogers, 1st District William B.Walker, M.D.
Jeff Smith,2nd District sc Director&Health Officer
Gayle Bishop,3rd District ? '_•4�
Mark DeSaulnler,4th District ti' 20 Allen Street
Tom Torlakson,5th District ;i _ - Martinez,California 94553-3191
County Administrator o! ,;ewu (510)370-5003
_ FAX(510)370-5099
Phil Batchelor '•.
County Administrator °os
rA-c6uK`�
To: Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier
Supervisor Jeff Smith
Family and Human Services Committee
From: Mary Foran
Assistant to the Health Services Director
Subject: Progress Report on the Family Maintenance Organization
Date: MAY 8, 1996
FMO development in the past three months has focused in three areas:
1. Submission of final report on the 20-month planning process to the Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation.
2. Progress on the cost study.
3. Examining ways to reconfigure the health activities at the Bay Point SIT to
incorporate the FMO program design recommendations.
Final Report to Foundation
The greatest challenge to developing the FMO has been its ambitious scope --
combining prevention and intervention, health care and social support into one design;
focusing on families rather than individuals when existing local data systems have
limited or no capacity to recognize families; and proposing a different financial model
across multiple programs. Our planning has taken place in a context of multiple efforts
to improve outcomes for families in our county. Each effort has been on a different
schedule with particular immediate objectives. Largely due to the work of the FMO
project, the same broad family health outcome objectives have been adopted by all
programs, but the operational melding of the planning efforts across the interagency
sectors is still in process. The continued uncertainty of funding for the emerging
programs has limited our ability to launch the unified effort. However, we believe the
results of the cost study described below will provide additional information to support
moving forward.
Merrithew Memorial Hospital&Health Centers • Public Health • Mental Health • Substance Abuse • Environmental Health
Contra Costa Health Plan • Emergency Medical Services • Home Health Agency • Geriatrics
A-345 (1/96)
The desire to create a funding model which would shift costs from one part of the health
and human service system to another required us to start with what is --we examined
individual health status measures and existing individual/household health care
utilization patterns. We found that despite the inadequacies of our current publicly-
funded health care system, it has several key features which make it relatively more
efficient than most. It is family practice, not specialty-based; outpatient-driven rather
than inpatient-driven; it already includes advice nurses and some attention to managing
our individuals who are very high utilizers.
Our utilization analysis supports the contention that there is room for cost shifting by
reducing emergency room use and better management of chronic health conditions.
However, the pilot area for the project is small; projected savings would be modest. An
initial analysis suggests savings could support the proposed family-focused prevention
activities but would not be sufficient to add the health intervention services --
substance abuse treatment and community mental health services --which are not
available now. In summary, the potential for shifting funds to invest in prevention by
reducing inappropriate utilization may be somewhat limited in a system which has
already reduced the most expensive forms of inappropriate utilization.
The current reality in public systems is fiscal reductions in the face of mounting social
problems. We challenge ourselves to restructure to be able to do more with the same,
but frequently fewer resources. The FMO design requires a long term commitment to
investing in prevention for families when all systems are facing reductions and great
uncertainty in the structure of future funding. The design of the FMO recognizes the
non-health system determinants of family health. Besides affecting how funds are
allocated in the health system, the FMO should create savings in the non-health care
sectors of the County -- Child Protective Services, Juvenile Justice and education. The
amount of such savings must be estimated for the potential it may create to support the
substance abuse and family mental health services. To do so requires implementing
the FMO cost study.
Finally, it may be that our desire to fold together prevention of common family health
issues with amelioration of the consequences of the more severe family health
problems of chronic disease, substance abuse, domestic violence and child abuse is
not tenable in the current political and fiscal climate. Our planning process revealed
the basic unavailability of resources to assist families in great distress.
A cost effectiveness argument alone may not show that there are sufficient current
resources to invest in prevention and address serious current problems. Again, the
cost study will allow us to tease out both the prevention and intervention sides of the
equation.
2
We may find that the FMO needs to be two programs -- one that integrates the
resources for supporting families in the community -- the community-based prevention
approach; and the other which combines the resources for high risk, high utilizing
families across the medical care - substance abuse - mental health - protective
services -juvenile justice programs.
Cost Study
In line with the approach of viewing the FMO as two closely related programs, and after
assessing the quality and availability of the needed data, we have broken the cost
study into two pieces. The first segment will estimate the total health expenditures for
family health prevention activities and primary medical care in Bay Point. Few
programs are able to identify services specific to Bay Point and many programs are not
automated. Thus, we will be limited to creating educated estimates of current
prevention/primary care expenditures. Sixteen programs will be included. The purpose
of aggregating these expenditures is to highlight the amount of funds being invested
and to examine the opportunities for program consolidation to reduce categorical
fragmentation and administrative duplication.
The second element of the cost study will be an in-depth analysis of programs
providing intensive intervention services to families in Bay Point. The analysis will
require integration of data from Health Services, Social Service and Probation. It will
go beyond the "data-match" conducted 3 years ago, which launched the SIT, to
examine the cost, type and, if possible, sequence of services provided. The purpose of
this part of the cost study is to identify the opportunities for pooling of funds and
creation of a more efficient funding mechanism.
SIT and FMO
Our plan to begin implementation in March of the parent outreach and education
elements of the FMO within the Bay Point SIT were put on hold due to internal
personnel changes. We are in the process of reconfiguring our health team. This team
will be responsible for melding together the various health activities in Bay Point into a
coherent whole which will complement the Healthy Start, Family Preservation Support
Program, school-based health center and SIT initiatives.
cc: William Walker, M.D.
MPF:kn
a:progress.hno
3