Grant Administration using Technology

1
Grant Administration using Technology

• Kevin McNeal,
• Program Manager
• Ryan White Part A, Phoenix EMA
• Maricopa County, Arizona

2
Objectives

• Advantages to utilizing technology in Grant
  Administration
• Challenges
• Evolution of a technology-based system of care
• Results

3
Advantages

• Reporting and Analysis
• Real time reporting
• Aggregate data
• Monitoring/Oversight
• Provider level
• Service category level
• Streamlining the system
• Reduced manual work
• Standardized data
• Consistent across the continuum

4
Challenges

• Buy In
• Providers
• Planning Council
• Consumers
• HRSA
• Implementation
• Not overnight its a process
• Integrity of Data
• Critical to maintain data integrity
• Work Flow
• Adapting to change
• Process development

5
Evolution

• Identify Stakeholders
• What do they want/need
• Planning Council, HRSA, Consumers, etc.
• Identify Program Needs
• What do we want/need to tell them
• Identify system/technology needs
• Infrastructure Grantee and Providers
• What is utilized
• What is needed

6
Evolution

• Plan
• Timeline How long will it take?
• Standardization (across the system everyone
  reporting the same way)
• Expectations
• Provider
• IT
• AA Infrastructure
• Conversion
• How to actually implement the changes
• Protect Data Integrity
• Testing
• Phoenix EMA staggered
• Review/refine
• PDSA
• Glitches expect them

7
Results

• Reporting/Analysis
• Data integrity-
• Data is from consistent source The Grantee
• Providers report in standardized methodology
• Same expectations across the continuum
• Multiple providers can be aggregated.
• Relational data
• Data can be cross referenced across services,
  providers
• Standard Reporting
• Information is standardized and reported across
  continuum
• Audience across all levels
• Client level data can report trends and
  utilization from clients across different service
  categories.
• (Example graph of PA CM to other services)

8
BEFORE
9
Utilization Reports
10
Utilization Reports - Cont
11
Data Analysis

• Data Analysis/Mining
• Central database Grantee can access the data
• Ad hoc reporting
• Query reports as questions arise
• Relational data
• Data is reported across the continuum
• Aggregate data reporting

12
Adhoc Reporting
13
OUTCOMES

• Monitoring/Oversight
• Exception reporting without having to review
  everything every month.
• Trends
• Anomalies
• Identification of potential issues\
• Client unmet need/service gaps
• Cost variances/allowability

14
Site Visits

• Key Factors
• Grantee has demographic data
• Reviews conducted at random, not from Providers
• Real time reporting to Providers
• Goal to reduce administrative time spent
  compiling data
• Process
• Site Visits are performed annually
• Monitoring tool is automated
• Data Collection is done on site
• Reporting can be finalized within 5 days

15
Site Visit Tool
16
Site Visit Tool - Cont
17
Site Visit Tool - Reporting
18
Grant Management

• Key Factors
• Core 75 and Supportive 25 Tracking
  Formula/Supplemental Tracking
• Tracking of Sub Contractors
• Balancing to Internal Government Finance System
• Timely Reporting of Grant Performance and
  Expenditures
• Goal to Reduce Administrative time to compile
  data
• Process
• All data is stored in system
• Financial and Programmatic monitoring workflow
• Site Visits and CQM Site Visits data is compiled
• Grant Performance and Expenditure Reporting can
  be completed timely

19
Grant Management Database
20
OUTCOMES

• Streamlining the system
• Data Driven decision process
• Timely client level reporting
• Identify unmet need/service gaps
• Relational Data
• Client Level Data - Demographics
• Service Category
• Anecdotal information accounted for
• Technical Assistance
• Real time TA
• TA needs can be addressed at Provider and service
  level
• Goto meeting
• Travel Time
• Can help them directly at their computer
• Can watch them do data entry real time

21
Benefits

• Reduced Administrative Costs
• Grantee
• Integrated tools reduce manual data entry and
  compilation of data
• Site visit/ Grant Management database
• Adhoc and custom reporting
• Queries can be run quickly without having to
  collect data from multiple providers
• Standardized data can compile and aggregate data
  easily and quickly
• Providers
• Data connectors (reduce double data entry)
• Importer transactions 6500 transactions / month
  55 hours
• Adhoc reporting
• Less administrative burden by compiling and
  reporting data manually to the AA
• Variance check points
• Providers can quickly check grant
  compliance/monitor their own activity

22
Requirements

• Understanding what is needed
• Developing processes and standards
• Technology should be used to reduce time on
  mundane tasks
• Data Entry
• Data Compilation Standard Requirements
• Adhoc tools available to answer questions
• Validation tests to ensure data is accurate
• Technical Assistance for staff and providers

23
Lessons Learned

• Without Buy-In systems will fail
• Implementation timelines must be realistic
• Include a PDSA cycle
• Develop a plan with flexibility
• Technical Assistance is critical

24
Contact Information

• Kevin McNeal
• Maricopa County
• 301 W Jefferson, Suite 3200
• Phoenix, Arizona 85003
• 602-506-6181
• kevinmcneal_at_mail.maricopa.gov
• Julie Young
• TriYoung Business Solutions, Inc
• 8024 N 24th Ave, Suite 302
• Phoenix, Az 85021
• 602-424-1700
• jyoung_at_azbizsolutions.com