Mid-Point Assessment Action Plans:

PPS Progress through DY3, Q2

  • Report is also available in Portable Document Format (PDF)

November 2017

Contents

Mid–Point Assessment Recommendation Review

Changes to PPS Reporting

PPS Progress on Mid–Point Assessment Action Plans

|top of page|

Mid–Point Assessment Review

Mid–Point Assessment Recommendation Themes

  • 22 of 25 PPS had recommendations as a result of the Mid–Point Assessment process.
    • Total number of recommendations ranged from 1 (3 PPS) to 23 (1 PPS).
  • Recommendations were organizational or project specific.
  • The most common recommendation was the ´Standard Modification´ recommendation from PAOP.
    • 14 of the 25 PPS received this recommendation.
The PPS must develop a detailed plan for engaging partners across all projects with specific focus on Primary Care, Mental Health, Substance Used Disorder providers as well as Community Based Organizations (CBOs). The Plan must outline a detailed timeline for meaningful engagement.

The Plan must also include a description of how the PPS will flow funds to partners so as to ensure success in DSRIP.

The PPS must also submit a detailed report on how the PPS will ensure successful project implementation efforts with special focus on projects identified by the IA as being at risk.

These reports will be reviewed and approved by the IA with feedback from the PAOP prior to April 1, 2017.
|top of page|

Mid–Point Assessment Action Plans

  • PPS that received at least one recommendation as a result of the Mid–Point Assessment process were required to complete a Mid–Point Assessment Action Plan.
    • Action Plans were due to the IA by March 10, 2017.
    • Action Plans were available for PAOP and public comment on March 20, 2017.
    • Final IA Approval of the Action Plans was completed by April 30, 2017.
  • PPS were required to implement Action Plans by the conclusion of DY3, Q2 (September 30, 2017).
  • PPS updates on progress towards implementing the Action Plans were provided as part of the DY3, Q1 PPS Quarterly Report in July 2017 and will provide final updates as part of the DY3, Q2 PPS Quarterly Report in October 2017.
|top of section| |top of page|

Changes to PPS Reporting

Changes to PPS Reporting

  • During the PAOP meetings in February 2017, PPS noted limitations of the current reporting tool, the PIT, for Funds Flow and Partner Engagement.
  • In response to this feedback, the IA and DOH, created a new tool, the PIT–Replacement to support the reporting of Funds Flow and Partner Engagement.
    • The PIT–Replacement tool provides PPS with more flexibility in identifying and reporting their partners in the category or categories that most accurately reflect how the partner has been engaged by the PPS.
    • The PIT–Replacement also allows PPS to report their 2nd Tier Funds Flow distributions.
    • The Hospital and Case Management/Health Home categories were broken out in to multiple categories to allow for more discrete reporting of Funds Flow.
  • Additional clarification was also provided on the reporting of Funds Flow to the CBO Partner Type Category.
    • This category should represent only the Tier 1 CBOs that have received funds from the PPS. Tier 2 and Tier 3 CBOs would be reflected under the appropriate partner category, such as Mental Health, Substance Abuse, Clinic, or Case Management.
|top of section| |top of page|

PPS Progress on Action Plans

PPS Progress on Mid–Point Action Plans – Funds Flow

  • Through the DY3, Q2 PPS Quarterly Report, PPS have increased the amount of funding distributed to partners relative to the funding distributed at the time of the Mid–Point Assessment.
  Cumulative Funds Flow at MPA (DY2, Q2) Cumulative Funds Flow at DY3, Q2 Additional Funds Flow since MPA % Change in Funds Flow
Total Funds Flow $414,267,236 $1,100,047,613 $6,857,800,376 166%
Non–Hospital / Non–PPS PMO Funds Flow $113,408,240 $344,803,581 $231,395,341 204%
  • For the categories highlighted in the Mid–Point Assessment, PPS Funds Flow distributions increased by over 100%.
Partner Category Cumulative Funds Flow at MPA (DY2, Q2) Cumulative Funds Flow at DY3, Q2 Additional Funds Flow since MPA % Change in Funds Flow
Practitioner – Primary Care Provider (PCP) $14,659,935 $63,754,315 $49,094,381 335%
Mental Health $9,741,485 $35,291,921 $25,550,436 262%
Substance Abuse $4,319,963 $12,780,469 $8,460,506 196%
Community Based Organizations $11,993,454 $33,990,664 $21,997,210 183%

  As of MPA (DY2, Q2) As of DY3, Q2 Changes since MPA
  Funds Distributed % of Funds Distributed Funds Distributed % of Funds Distributed Funds Distributed % increase in Funds Disbursed
Practitioner – Primary Care Provider (PCP) $14,659,935 3.54% $63,754,315 5.80% $49,094,381 335%
Practitioner – Non–Primary Care Provider (PCP) $2,654,701 0.64% $6,223,342 0.57% $3,568,641 134%
Hospital $121.775967 29.40% $182,521,398 16.59% $60,745,431 50%
Hospital – IP/ED^ $0 0.00% $147,358,192 13.40% $147,358,192 100%
Hospital – Ambulatory^ $0 0.00% $29,612,421 2.69% $29,612,421 100%
Clinic $29,687,182 7.17% $87,904,817 7.99% $58,217,635 196%
Case Management / Health Home $5,973,274 1.44% $17,408,904 1.58% $11,435,631 191%
Case Management^ $0 0.00% $4,670,951 0.42% $4,670,951 100%
Health Home^ $0 0.00% $3,255,815 0.30% $3,255,815 100%
Mental Health $9,741,485 2.35% $35,291,921 3.21% $25,550,436 262%
Substance Abuse $4,319,963 1.04% $12,780,469 1.16% $8,460,506 196%
Nursing Home $5,476,856 1.32% $18,177,581 1.65% $12,700,725 232%
Pharmacy $305,708 0.07% $1,461,616 0.13% $1,155,908 378%
Hospice $739,659 0.18% $3,279,031 0.30% $2,539,372 343%
Community Based Organization $11,993,454 2.90% $33,990,664 3.09% $21,997,210 183%
All Other $23,297,909 5.62% $39,802,885 3.62% $16,504,976 71%
Home Care^ $0 0.00% $2,503,255 0.23% $2,503,255 100%
PPS PMO $179,083,029 43.23% $395,752,021 35.98% $216,668,992 121%
Other* $4,558,116 1.10% $14,298,017 1.30% $9,739,900 214%
TOTAL – All Categories $414,267,236 $1,100,047,613 $685,780,376 166%

* Other category includes Partner Type Categories for Uncategorized, Non–PPS Network, County Agency, CBO Tier 3.
^ Hospital – IP/ED, Hospital – Ambulatory, Case Management, Health Home, and Home Care categories are new following MPA.

PPS Progress on Mid–Point Action Plans – Standard Modification Funds Flow

  • For the 14 PPS that received the ´Standard Modification´ recommendation from PAOP, the overall funding distribution and Non–Hospital/Non–PPS PMO distributions have increased since the Mid– Point Assessment.
  Cumulative Funds Flow at MPA (DY2, Q2) Cumulative Funds Flow at DY3, Q2 Additional Funds Flow since MPA % Change in Funds Flow
Total Funds Flow $264,754,674 $699,604,489 $434,849,814 164%
Non–Hospital / Non–PPS PMO Funds Flow $71,559,831 $210,583,372 $139,023,541 194%
  • For the categories specifically highlighted in the ´Standard Modification´ recommendation, PPS Funds Flow distributions increased by over 200%.
Partner Category Cumulative Funds Flow at MPA (DY2, Q2) Cumulative Funds Flow at DY3, Q2 Additional Funds Flow since MPA % Change in Funds Flow
Practitioner – Primary Care Provider (PCP) $11,703,793 $51,322,092 $39,618,299 339%
Mental Health $6,735,971 $25,234,622 $18,498,651 275%
Substance Abuse $2,669,425 $8,255,026 $5,585,601 209%
Community Based Organizations $4,283,943 $13,638,510 $9,354,567 218%

  As of MPA (DY2, Q2) As of DY3, Q2 Changes since MPA
  Funds Distributed % of Funds Distributed Funds Distributed % of Funds Distributed Funds Distributed % of Funds Distributed
Practitioner – Primary Care Provider (PCP) $11,703,793 4.42% $51,322,092 7.34% $39,618,299 339%
Practitioner – Non–Primary Care Provider (PCP) $2,136,190 0.81% $5,576,547 0.80% $3,440,357 161%
Hospital $72,126,205 27.24% $100,475,721 14.36% $28,349,516 39%
Hospital – IP/ED^ $0 0.00% $117,828,496 16.84% $117,828,496 100%
Hospital – Ambulatory^ $0 0.00% $15,982,839 2.28% 15,982,839 100%
Clinic $17,886,239 6.76% $49,520,263 7.08% $31,634,025 177%
Case Management / Health Home $3,462,626 1.31% $7,214,609 1.03% $3,751,982 108%
Case Management^ $0 0.00% $1,966,990 0.28% $1,996,990 100%
Health Home^ $0 0.00% $1,145,040 0.16% $1,145,040 100%
Mental Health $6,735,971 2.54% $25,234,622 3.61% $18,948,651 275%
Substance Abuse $2,669,425 1.01% $8,255,026 1.18% $5,585,601 209%
Nursing Home $1,233,657 0.47% $6,340,459 0.91% $5,106,802 414%
Pharmacy $277,797 0.10% $1,214,378 0.17% $936,581 337%
Hospice $563,842 0.21% $1,395,542 0.20% $831,700 148%
Community Based Organization $4,283,943 1.62% $13,638,510 1.95% $9,354,567 218%
All Other $18,748,126 7.08% $28,934,675 4.14% $10,186,548 54%
Home Care^ $0 0.00% $1,311,535 0.19% $1,311,535 100%
PPS PMO $121,068,638 45.73% $254,734,060 36.41% $133,665,422 110%
Other* $1,858,224 0.70% $7,513,086 1.07% $5,654,863 304%
TOTAL – All Categories $264,754,674 $699,604,489 $434,849,814 164%

* Other category includes Partner Type Categories for Uncategorized, Non–PPS Network, County Agency, CBO Tier 3.
^ Hospital – IP/ED, Hospital – Ambulatory, Case Management, Health Home, and Home Care categories are new following MPA.

PPS Progress on Mid–Point Action Plans – Partner Engagement

  • PPS have also made progress in increasing the number of partners engaged across the DSRIP Projects since the Mid–Point Assessment.
    • One PPS saw decreases in the number of engaged partners across multiple categories following the Mid–Point Assessment and has been excluded from these figures to avoid skewing the progress made by the remaining 24 PPS.
  Partner Commitments at DSRIP Application Partners Engaged at MPA Partners Engaged as of DY3, Q2 Additional Partners Engaged % Change in Partners Engaged
Partners Engaged 244,977 228,601 530,188 301,587 132%
  • Partner Engagement is defined as the PPS having a direct relationship with a partner as evidenced by a contract or other formal agreement.
    • The contract or formal agreement should identify the services to be provided by the partner on behalf of the PPS and the compensation from the PPS to the partner.
    • Partner compensation may be financial or through the provision of centralized service such as IT or staffing.
    As of MPA (DY2, Q2) As of DY3, Q2 Changes since MPA
Committed (in DSRIP project Plan Application) Partners Engaged % of Committed Partners Engaged Partners Engaged % of Committed Partners Engaged Additional Partners Engaged % increase in Partners Engaged
Practitioner – Primary Care 53,417 37,424 70% 84,125 157% 46,701 125%
Practitioner – Non–Primary Care 106,666 101,356 95% 256,892 241% 155,536 153%
Hospital 254 700 276% 1,150 453% 450 64%
Clinic 1,709 1,863 109% 3,105 182% 1,242 67%
Case Management / Health Home 1,298 1,242 96% 2,199 169% 957 77%
Mental Health 9,750 9,273 95% 24,113 247% 14,840 160%
Substance Abuse 1,235 960 78% 1,781 144% 821 86%
Nursing Home 860 1,104 128% 1,329 155% 225 20%
Pharmacy 979 324 33% 689 70% 365 113%
Hospice 96 174 181% 225 234% 51 29%
Community Based Organization 2,771 2,064 74% 3,303 119% 1,239 60%
All Other 65,942 72,117 109% 151,277 229% 79,160 110%
TOTAL – All Partners 244,977 228,601 93% 530,188 216% 301,587 132%

* Note: Count of committed and engaged partners does not reflect an unduplicated count. PPS could commit to and engage the same partner across multiple projects.

PPS Progress on Mid–Point Action Plans – Standard Modification Partner Engagement

  • 13 PPS have also made progress in increasing the number of partners engaged across the DSRIP Projects since the Mid–Point Assessment.
    • One PPS saw decreases in the number of engaged partners across multiple categories following the Mid–Point Assessment and has been excluded from these figures to avoid skewing the progress made by the remaining 13 PPS.
  Partner Commitments at DSRIP Application Partners Engaged at MPA (DY2, Q2) Partners Engaged as of DY3, Q2 Additional Partners Engaged % Change in Partners Engaged
Partners Engaged 164,201 147,858 322,818 105,348 71%
  • For the categories specifically highlighted in the ´Standard Modification´ recommendation, PPS partner engagement increased for those 13 PPS.
  Partner Commitments at DSRIP Application Partners Engaged at MPA (DY2, Q2) Partners Engaged as of DY3, Q2 Additional Partners Engaged % Change in Partners Engaged
Practitioner Primary Care 35,383 23,613 52,118 28,505 121%
Mental Health 6,238 6,145 16,488 10,343 168%
Substance Abuse 751 462 917 455 98%
Community Based Organizations 1,768 469 651 182 39%

    As of MPA (DY2, Q2) As of DY3, Q2 Changes since MPA
Committed (in DSRIP project Plan Application) Partners Engaged % of Committed Partners Engaged Partners Engaged % of Committed Partners Engaged Additional Partners Engaged % increase in Partners Engaged
Practitioner – Primary Care 35,383 23,613 67% 52,118 147% 28,505 121%
Practitioner – Non–Primary Care 74,035 70,819 96% 160,220 216% 89,401 126%
Hospital 150 469 313% 750 500% 281 60%
Clinic 998 1,046 105% 1,659 166% 613 59%
Case Management / Health Home 751 649 86% 1,152 153% 503 78%
Mental Health 6,238 6,145 99% 16,488 264% 10,343 168%
Substance Abuse 751 462 62% 917 122% 455 98%
Nursing Home 467 692 148% 811 174% 119 17%
Pharmacy 849 141 17% 297 35% 156 111%
Hospice 54 113 209% 158 293% 45 40%
Community Based Organization 1,768 469 27% 651 37% 182 39%
All Other 42,757 43,240 101% 87,597 205% 44,357 103%
TOTAL – All Partners 164,201 147,858 90.05% 322,818 197% 174,960 118%

* Note: Count of committed and engaged partners does not reflect an unduplicated count. PPS could commit to and engage the same partner across multiple projects.

|top of section| |top of page|