Transforming Together: Implementation Guide
Tool Spotlight: The Examples of Community Need, Goals, and Metrics (ESC Toolkit) provides concrete outcome frameworks counties can use to align measures across systems and reduce duplication. Similarly, in comparing and analyzing data from multiple systems and agencies, a different California county’s Interagency Leadership Team learned schools offering intensive mental health services had significantly fewer students who entered or re- entered the foster care system. Cross-agency data have also shown that young children whose families received help through a community school program were less likely to enter the child welfare system. These insights only became clear when partners took time to compare their data and outcomes across agencies. In some cases, state requirements already expect agencies to compare their outcome data with other agencies. These existing processes can be creatively expanded. Some opportunities include: • The Mental Health Plan’s External Quality Review (EQRO) process requires participation from multiple systems, including child welfare and juvenile justice. When done well, it includes youth and parent input and reveals how investments in one area (such as mental health) affect others (such as child welfare).
• Similarly, the Community Health Assessment (CHA) and Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP) processes encourage departments to align timelines, questions, and findings—giving a fuller picture of what communities need (see here). These processes now connect closely with the MCP Population Needs Assessment (PNA) and related state efforts to integrate CHA, CHIP, and PNA findings into a unified BHSA Integrated Plan framework, ensuring that local priorities and statewide planning are informed by consistent, population- level data (see DHCS Population Health Management Strategy). • California now has a unique opportunity, within its Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) Integrated Plan requirements, to establish an ecosystem wide reporting process that parallels local design objectives. While the reporting obligation for this data is the responsibility of the county BHS or MHP, the outcome measures included span a broad spectrum of partner objectives. The Behavioral Health Outcomes, Accountability, and Transparency Reports (BHOATR), could essentially serve as a universal outcomes frame for any county.
50
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator