Human Services Board Meeting

hsbminutesjan2012.pdf (34 KB)

MINUTES
SAUK COUNTY BOARD OF HUMAN SERVICES

Meeting: January 9, 2012, 5:00 p.m., County Board Gallery, Baraboo, WI

Members Present: Alexander, Dippel, Fordham, Stoeckmann, Fabisiak, Vertein, Lombard, Bowers

Members Excused: Sinklair

Members Absent: None

Others Present: Orth, Brattset, Box

Chair Alexander called the meeting to order and certified compliance with the Open Meeting Law.

Motion by Lombard, seconded by Dippel to adopt the agenda. Motion Carried.

Motion by Vertein, seconded by Fabisiak to approve minutes of the previous meeting. Discussion: Please include one change under H. change lie to like. Motion Carried.

Public Comment
None.

Communications:
Brattset noted that the letter to the Baraboo News Republic Editor was sent and that correspondence with this person has occurred in order to meet to discuss the content of the letter which was previously reviewed by the Board.

Business Items:

A. Review and Approval of Monthly Vouchers: Box distributed the monthly vouchers. Salary and Benefits were increased this month due to an increase number of pay periods. In addition, Administrative costs were up due to billing and travel time. Institutions were up due to the lack of Winnebago/Mendota rebates. Motion by Stoeckmann, seconded by Vertein to approve vouchers in the amount of $1,076,934.36. Motion Carried.

B. Approval of 2012 Contracts: Box reviewed a summary of the 2012 contracts to include: For a total of $4,394,146.00.

Contract Dollar Amount of Contract
2012 Community Youth & Family Aids $ 607,728.00
2012 Title III Contract (Elder Abuse) $ 21,768.00
2012 IMAA Consortium Contract (Income Maintenance) $ 419,407.00
2012 Department of Children & Families Welfare Allocations $ 382,815.00
2012 Purchase of Service Agreement (W-2 & Children’s First) $ 37,482.00
2012 State and County Contract, Social Service & Comm. Programs $2,809,879.00
2012 Annual State-County Child Care Services Admin. & Operations $ 115,067.00
$4,394,146.00

Box reviewed the specific contracts and chart (see attached) that summarizes previous year’s contracts. Motion by Lombard, seconded by Dippel to approve contracts as summarized. Discussion: Dippel asked what is the contract review graph. Box then summarized the details from the graph which corresponds to specific contracts. Box further explained that the reason the contract summary does not compare specifically to full contract amounts is that the approvals for these contracts are for the first half of 2012, not the full year. In addition, the state will send updates to these contracts after that time period. Motion Carried.



C. CCS Advisory Committee – Reappointment of Kim Alvin: Motion by Bowers, seconded by Fabisiak to approve Kim Alvin as a member of the CCS Advisory Committee. Motion Carried.


Department Updates:

A. Income Maintenance Program Contracts and Operations: Orth noted that the Income Maintenance contract negotiations went very well. The largest two issues include that any fiscal change will include notice to Human Service Departments and a process to discuss and negotiate these fiscal concerns. In addition, there will be a period designated, if negotiations fail for Human Service Departments to ask the state to take over services. Stoeckmann asked if this will allow for protecting fiscal impacts. Orth indicated that it would do that. Also, the second part of the contract that was favorable is that if a content dispute occurs, hearing and appeals can be taken to the Circuit Court. In addition, counties will share in any bonuses that might occur. Stoeckmann asked, did they want to take over Economic Support and is this potentially a negotiation to do that in the end. Orth indicated that yes, they did want to take over Economic Support, but the state never could have done this logistically, in all likelihood this would have failed. Orth further indicated that as of 1/2/12 the new consortium system has started and there are some concerns regarding the Call Change Center taking over what was previously a local process. People are being encouraged to use the change center, however, this will take some time for people to understand and for the process to work more efficiently. Orth indicated that this appears to be a process that is continuing to grow.

B. Safety Services Grant: Orth indicated that Sauk County, along with a number of other counties from the FPI consortium and LSS was awarded the Safety Services Grant. These counties, with LSS will partner to create two teams in the region to establish safety teams which will be available 24/7 to provide safety plans for cases from child protective services. In the next two weeks, the counties and LSS will meet to discuss implementation details.

C. TMG Committee Update: Orth noted that at the last TMG meeting, there was a motion to join and combine the Public Health and Human Services Boards to make one, nine member board. However, the departments would be independent. This motion was tabled after discussion and at the next TMG meeting scheduled for 1/12/12, will be continued to be discussed. Alexander noted that it was also discussed at the TMG meeting to adopt the quality management function within the functional group. Stoeckmann spoke about other recommendations to include: the functional group to use CQI (Continuous Quality Improvement) concepts. This was approved as well. Stoeckmann further reiterated that the “Mega” Board concept was voted down. Stoeckmann further spoke about combining the Public Health and Human Services Boards that she is unsure why we would be doing that. Stoeckmann asked if this is a cost savings? She further indicated that Chair Krueger said no, it was not in order to save money, rather increase the communication between the two boards. Stoeckmann indicated that she wondered about that because there has been no scientific evidence and no process embarked upon to evaluate the functioning of the boards and how the departments communicate with one another through these boards. Stoeckmann indicated that she had also asked Todd Liebman that for work purposes, could boards meet periodically to communicate and update one another. Stoeckmann indicated that Liebman had indicated that this could be done. Stoeckmann further indicated that she did not feel it was logical at this point to combine the boards. Stoeckmann further indicated that there had been discussions previously by the Public Health Board of combining boards and this was unanimously declined. In addition, she indicated that the current board does not see it as a logical thing to do at this time. If these boards were combined, Stoeckmann indicated that it should include a comprehensive summary of benefits and barriers which should be explored prior to making that decision. Stoeckmann requested that the Human Services objectives and functional group be a standing agenda item on the Human Services Board agenda. Orth indicated that this could be done in the future. Lombard asked that Cindy Bodendein, who was in the audience, could speak regarding her impressions on research she has done regarding combining of boards. Cindy Bodendein, Director of Public Health, indicated that she had spoken to a number of counties and that several of the counties did not think that it was a good idea. One county she had contacted, thought that it was favorable. In regards to the counties that were concerned about combining boards, Cindy Bodendein indicated that Public Health would not get enough time in these other county’s representatives opinions, to review issues. Cindy Bodendein indicated that she did not see a need to combine the boards and did not see any cost savings in doing this. Cindy Bodendein also expressed that if the boards are together then the next step, she worries, is that the department’s would be combined. Vertein indicated that she spoke to a previous public health nurse and could not see the process of combining boards as favorable. It was indicated that this could be a “back door” to combining the departments. Lombard asked Orth to give his opinion regarding combining of boards. Orth indicated that Human Service Directors, for the most part, have seen the outcomes as positive. In general, he noted that Public Health Departments do not view it as a positive. Orth further expanded that he thinks that if we do not do this now, it will happen at a later date and be more difficult to implement. Fordham indicated that she had attended many of the TMG meetings and that from her experience in Family Care, the climate and the amount of change happens rapidly. Fordham indicated that in order to respond effectively and appropriately separate boards would slow the process down. In addition, Fordham indicated that combined boards do not mean that the departments will be combined. She further spoke that we can have combined boards and still have separate departments. Fordham indicated that the timing is important now due to the upcoming elections and board reappointments. She further reiterated that this would not net a fiscal cost savings now. Lombard indicated that it was her understanding that Orth had stated that the departments may combine in the future. Orth noted that might be true. Stoeckmann indicated that Public Health has federal and state dollars primarily and very few levy dollars and asked why would combining the boards be a safety net for Public Health? Stoeckmann further stated that no individuals making this decision are on the Public Health Board. She questions why this combined board concept would be pursued at this time in that there is a lot in the TMG report that needs to be focused on Human Services. Fordham indicated that it is clear that there are disagreements on this topic. Bowers indicated that whatever should occur, consumers should dictate what we do, providing the best possible outcome for services. Fordham indicated that consumers would not be directly affected as this is more related to management and oversight. Cindy Bodendein was asked her opinion by Lombard. Cindy Bodendein indicated that a combining of boards could create a lot of problems because Public Health was not studied specifically. The departments being combined does not make sense, according to Cindy Bodendein, since those saying this do not have Public Health experience. Lombard asked, will the dollars be taken from Public Health and given to Human Services? Bodendein indicated, yes, she is afraid that Public Health could lose some funding in the future if this were to occur.

D. Youth Aids Allocation Cuts: Orth noted that further Youth Aids cuts, as noted last month, are projected to be at about $15,000, maybe less. The Department should be able to manage this within the budget.

E. Family Care Cap: Orth indicated that the Governor is looking into the process of the Family Care Cap. There has been some confusion in that the federal government has indicated that this cannot be done at this time. The current status is unknown, but the Governor has insinuated that legislation will be sponsored which advocates for capping Family Care. This is still in disagreement with the federal opinion. It remains to be seen what will happen regarding the Family Care Cap.

F. Space Needs Study: Brattset reported that at a 1/9/12 meeting of the Property and Insurance Committee a presentation was done by Venture Architecht. They proposed three options, all of which would have details involved allowing Human Services staff currently in Baraboo to remain in Baraboo. All options would have Human Services move from the current occupied space on the second floor to the basement of the West Square Building. In addition, all options include remodeling the Economic Support waiting area and converting this area into office space. This committee will work with the County Board Chair, Administrative Coordinator, and Tim Stieve to get a decision as to which specific plan to follow by 2/6/12.


The next meeting of the Sauk County Human Services Board is scheduled for Monday, February 6, 2012 at 5:00 p.m.

Motion by Bowers, seconded by Fabisiak to adjourn. Motion Carried.




Andrea Lombard