Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
MRA Service Coordination for Home and Community-Based Services. Transition Information for HCS Providers Meeting 2 Heart of Texas Region MHMR Center January 21, 2010. Introductions. Agenda. Review Packet Information Recap of November Meeting 1. Meeting Outcome
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Transition Information for HCS Providers
Heart of Texas Region MHMR Center
January 21, 2010
1. Meeting Outcome
2. Review of Power Point
*Review of draft documents
The initiation of a collaborative local process for transition of HCS CM to MRA SC
San AntonioApril 5 & 6
HoustonApril 13 & 14
Fort WorthApril 19 & 20
Lubbock April 29 & 30
HoustonMay 11 & 12
Fort Worth May 18 & 19
DADS preparation priorities prior to transfer of HCS case management:
Despite a desire to have a template that would promote a consistent format, the draft document is wide open. Our opinion is that it would benefit providers and the MRA equally to have a format that is not as wide open, remains individualized, and meets the needs outlined in the instructions to the draft template.
2. II. B. Recommends that the SC be familiar with billing guidelines to facilitate “justifying supports and services”
Comment: This is a key area of confusion for delineating SC and Provider functions. The draft rule infers that the SC justify the type of service to be provided based on a desired outcome; the provider then justifies the amount of the service provided. Clarification is needed.
3. IV. A. bullet 4 States that the SC must monitor to determine whether an individual’s health and safety is ensured in the environments in which the individual frequents.
Comment: The SC should not be accountable for monitoring an individual in environments that are not related to HCS of non-HCS services and supports.
5. IV. D. 4 States that the SC is not responsible for providing the provider with a written review of their monitoring activities and documentation.
Comment: This implies that the MRA and the Provider are monitoring the same services separately, without input from each other. This is costly and inefficient duplication.
11. IX. B. C. States that the SC must ensure the HCS provider enters the suspension data in CARE screen C18.
Comment: This requirement, as worded here and in the draft rule, appears contradictory to the SC role to monitor the individual, not the provider.
1. January 28, 2010 stakeholder focus group (tentative schedule).
2. Brochure similar to the “Making Good Choices” brochure that explains available community services.
management to the MRA:
For FAQ updates, sign up for “Email Updates” through GovDeliveryat DADS website.
Primary MRA goals prior to June 1, 2010 implementation:
What worked this meeting?
What should change in the next meeting?
What do we know now that will need
to be discussed at next meeting