FAADS Workgroup Agenda

Wednesday February 8th

744 “P” Street, Sacramento, CA

Room 9419am – 3:30

9:00 -10:30Child Welfare Services - Review of Data with CDSS Staff-Donna Richardson.

  • CWS Hotline Funding Issue (IV-E to EA-TANF shift)Hermia Chow

Recap of prior conversation regarding the negative impact of this shift. Discussion focused on what data/PIN codesare being shifted and how to look at the EA allocation. Actual expenditures are available to make some adjustments in May but not sure if this appropriate. If a survey is used the numbers are convoluted because of the mix of codes the counties use. Question on how state decides who is made whole if we go over allocation. State has a fairly clear picture of how the shift is impacting counties. State is using historical data to see the growth. Adjustments at close out will allow state to have all actual data. If survey is done now state may be able to see which counties are overmatching. Each county claims there costs a little different so survey data could be misleading. SacramentoCounty has template for calculating hotline expenditures that can be used to help state. Is there a way to get a May revise for adjustment so counties do not have to wait for close out? Michael does not have a way to calculate the numbers by county based on need. How do you determine what amount of PIN 170 are shifted to 148 and 513? How do we manage the allocation? State is using last years actual to estimate what this year is going to look like. Counties will be covered for the shift, state feels that there is have enough money to cover actual costs. State has most of quarter two CEC numbers and they feel they are very close to estimates. Main question is do we want an adjustment now, with limited data or do we wait until closeout when all data is in? Sacramento wants to do a survey. Using 04/05 data is ok but not sure is the shift is 100% of 170 going to 513. State assures us that the hotline expenditures are split 50/50 IV-E to TANF, showing it as 50% each. Most counties think all is TANF. Consensus –CWDA and state to look at 04/05 and first two quarters of 05/06. Question – can we live with getting 50% of costs now and rest at close out? Fiscal has this on agenda and will make the decision as to which way to go. Can counties get specific codes to track this shift? State not sure if that can be done or is ideal because of the large number of codes already in place. Discussion on time study and program interpretation of EA vs Case management, investigation vs assessment. Will need to follow up for budget year.

  • CWS PIN codes – Survey by Sacramento County-discussion on use of pin codes in budget development. (Donna Richardson, Heather Yee – CDSS) Hermia Chow

Are there codes that are not being pulled? Summary of findings - #2 These codes are pulled separately, not part of initial calculation. PIN #143 State says there are no TOE for code for that PIN. TOE codes listed are not pulled as they are part of the SW unit cost calculation. Increases in overhead are not being added because of the freeze on PCAB. TOE codes for direct cost of service to client are there. Counties need to know what codes are not being pulled so that the costs are reported correctly so we get proper accounting and funding. If counties are using the wrong codes it is their choice and must have approval for certain direct charges. No increase is cost of doing business in the SW unit cost is a known factor. Justified FTE vs actual costs. Counties overmatching are gaining more of the allocation and those that did not were losing money, so going to FTE base was a way to spread the allocation more fairly. Estimates uses actual expenditures and FTE growth. Caseload growth will drive the FTE growth and will be factored into estimates. Growth statewide is applied to the bottom line and then spread by FTE. Direct charges are actualso an allocation based on FTE does not make sense. If LA has increases and allocation is based on actual then the rest of the counties will see a cut. Discussion on how increase and decrease will affect the whole. State asked to do a trend analysis of growth of direct costs vs FTE growth. Consensus to continue discussion when state has put the info together. Need to look at this data before it is taken to fiscal or directors. State web site has list of reports and fields that are pulled for the reports used to build the basic.

Survey can give a general idea of what counties are spending in TANF. Counties can get this number quickly and it can be helpful to State. Data can be used for closeout. Consensus to send out survey, Sacramento to send it out. Two questions – What % of time in 110 was shifted to 148 and 513? What % of time in 170 was shifted to 148 and 513? Will go out next week and due back in the next week.

10:30 -12:00PA to NA Fund Shift (NAFS) Methodology (CDSS-Nola Niegel, George Preacher, Julio Rodriguez)

Move to March – CDSS still working on this issue and have no response for us at this time. There will be a meeting with CDSS for their explanation of the methodology.

1:00 - 1:30Claiming and Accounting Issues –Didi Okamoto -

Terri O’Conner leaving to CHP.

Extranet project – will allow counties to see claims, CEC and assistance, online. Conceptual picture presented as to how the site would work. First 2 columns are templates, Financial column is new. This is where you see the most current quarter being worked on. Last four are links to where these documents normally reside.

Mary - TANF probation 04/05 closeout still in process. AA190 is coming, some counties have been overpaid. This money is advanced and then adjusted at closeout. Will be offset in the IV-E payments. Will send a report to CWDA.

  • AA 190 discussion and March CEC adjustments (DidiOkamoto-CDSS) Mary

Errors are being worked out. Lots of new staff so they are behind. March adjustment claim will be late. Call if you have a cash flow issue. Worst case, by April.

Question – How to claim asset as a direct cost to PI? State asked for question to go to fiscal policy.

Merced asked question about vehicle purchased that has not been answered. Didi will follow up.

1:30 - 2:30Review of matrix and next steps – Onita, Terrie, Maile

  • Allocation matrix document – how to use for FAADS work plan for 2006-what next? (Heather Yee – CDSS).Maile

Estimates branch has not yet had the opportunity to look at the document. State edits for children’s and adult’s given to Maile. Changes from last month are minor with the addition of the work done on the PA to NA shift. Medi-Cal added. Items that are going away ,ie ETV, were deleted. STOP to be updated. CWS augmentation – revision sent to Michael. Extra language taken out as it did not belong. The FTE’s used is convoluted, Michael has simplified it. What is on attachment 2 is used. Two types, justified and hold harmless, additional toget to hold harmless, are added together. Need to make a note that this is the funded FTEs. The group feels that it is now ready to be given to counties as a living work in process. State wants to wait until estimates branch has a chance to look at it. We can let the larger group know that we are very close to having it out. This document will be available on the CWDA web site. Michael to help get it on the fast track with estimates branch.

Question – Foster Care AAP – where do they get the data? State to take question back.

CWS #8 Direct charges – Will incorporate clarification on FTE as discussed earlier.

PIN codes could be an attachment.

List from the state on what PIN codes are pulled for building the budget can be another document that can be done. We have this for CWS, would like to have it for all programs. This would be helpful also.

2:30 – 3:30FAADS Workgroup topics

  • Work Plan Discussion – Work group Graham

Matirx is an ongoing item. Need a meeting calendar for the year. TFS cases, CalWORKs QRPB and child care are items that some would like to get into. Suggested that we go to the next level in terms of the Matrix. Fiscal should be the group directing FAADS activities. This is the best time to get CalWORKs items addressed as part of TANF reauthorization. Automation systems are also an issue that will be put into a savings premise. They are not giving counties new costs but are taking savings. Some counties have already taken this hit on these projects. Consensus- Ask fiscal for direction.

  • FAADS structure and mission – discuss options for Fiscal Committee consideration. – Graham Knaus

Fiscal wants a clear chair. Fiscal wants recommendation on structure and how to work the ongoing dialogue. Last month it went well. Now that this is not a big group FAADS can have one chair. Terry C nominated. Group still wantsa designated minute taker. Chair should feel free to ask for help. Discussion on how to support the group. Continue regional representation. Perhaps a co-chair to help when chair not available. This person can be anyone based on who the chair called. Graham to help get the state people needed. Consistency of membership and attendance is needed. State wants to know that we are a stable group. Ask for some time frame commitment by counties who were chosen at the regional level. Maybe make a list of alternates – we have this but it is not easy to do. Is the size of the group a factor? Meeting space issues discussed. Started with five regions with three reps from each = 15 people. Some counties stating they are not happy with current membership. The intent of the FAADS is to work with State not provide training. The training issue should be handled in a different arena. Some are missing the interaction of with the state. The original intent was for each region to be able to rotate people on a yearly basis. Northern has 3, Bay has 3, Central 3 with 1 for co-chair and 1 as minute taker for total of 5, Mother lode has 2 with Mono who can not always come for total of 3, Southern has 3. Consensus – This is a fair representation. Ask for staggered one year commitment, each region to decide when to change. The group is still doing fact finding and have yet to get into a specific project and when we do, it will be better.

  • UC Davis Training for FAADS – Options/status?

Subject Suggestion – Realignment – Power Point presentation from State is a start. Fiscal training from UCD has piece that can be used also. Normally UCD trainings are broad topics, we may need to get more specific.