Moving Towards Sustainability: The Journey Continues

COAGSMH MeetingJanuary 31, 2014

2

Agenda

Our Time Together

Welcome and Introductions

The Journey Towards Sustainability

CalMHSA Partner Updates

Capitalizing on Innovation

Taking the Show on the Road

Continuing the Discussion

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

Staff, members, and those calling in

The Journey So Far: Assessing Where We AreRecap of last meeting:

focus areas and next steps

Review agenda adjust as needed

4

Goals for the Day

Seek

Contribute

Collaborate

Innovate

Build

6

Making Change

7

Collective Impact

7

8

CalMHSA Updates

9

Capitalizing on Innovation

Fostering Partnerships

Mobile Applications

Other Strategies

CAPITALIZING ON INNOVATION: SHARING KNOWLEDGE WITH COMMUNITY COLLEGES

Sally Jue, MSW

11

Building Collaborative Relationships:

Community Colleges County Mental Health DepartmentsLocal Mental Health Providers

12

Challenges

Finding local resources Finding the right DMH contact Competing priorities—no time or

resources Not getting a response

13

Success Factors

Committed, persistent, patient individuals In person initial meeting Identified mutual benefits and incentives Clear immediate and long term

expectations, especially re: communication College participation in local MH community DMH and CBO on campus activities Sustainable infrastructure

14

Innovative CBG Activities

Santa Monica College and Los Angeles County DMH case conferences

Los Angeles College Consortium and LAC DMH Strategic Action Plan

Campus based mental health intern programs

Wellness centers Coping skills and support groups

provided by community providers on campus

15

Knowledge Transfer Ideas

Webinars Case studies CCC and DMH collaboration toolkit

16

Taking the Show on the Road

Review Existing Data

Determine Key Messages and Best Ways to Share Findings

Next Steps

Maximizing Our Data and Sharing Our Results

USING DATA IN PRACTICEA BRIEF OVERVIEW

Bob Saltz, PIRE

18

Purposes of Evaluation/Evaluation Questions

Produce information in order to enhance management decision-making

Improve program operations Maximize benefits to clients: to what

extent and how well was the policy/program implemented?

Arden Handler, DrPHProfessor, Community Health SciencesUniversity of Illinois at Chicago

19

Purposes of Evaluation/Evaluation Questions

Assess systematically the impact of programs/policies on the problems they are designed to ameliorate How well did the program/policy work? Was the program worth its costs? What is the impact of the program/policy on

the community?

20

Two Main Types Of Evaluation

Process or formative

Outcome or summative

21

Process or Formative Evaluation Did the program/policy meet its process

objectives? Was the program/policy implemented as

planned? What were the type and volume of

services provided? Who was served among the population

at risk?

22

Why Do We Do Process Evaluation? Process evaluation

Provides feedback to the administrator regarding the program

Allows others to replicate the program if program looks attractive

Provides info to the outcome evaluation about program implementation and helps explain findings

23

Outcome or Summative Evaluation Did the program/policy meet its outcome

objectives/goals? Did the program/policy make a

difference?

24

Outcome or Summative Evaluation What change occurred in the population

participating in or affected by the program/policy?

What are the intended and unintended consequences of this program/policy? Requires a comparison group to judge

success What impact did the program/policy

have on the target community? Requires information about coverage

25

Why Do We Do Outcome Evaluation?

We want to know if what we are doing works better than nothing at all

We want to know if what we are doing new works better than what we usually do

26

Summary

However, the ability to translate evaluation findings into good programs and policy does not only depend on quality data, but on political will

27

Integrated Model of theResearch – Policy Relationship

ContextPolitical and Institutional structuresInterests and roles of stakeholders

EvidenceCredibility of the researchActive engagement with research

LinksClose links between researchers and policy-makersPerceived expertise or legitimacy

28

Supporting the Use ofResearch in Practice

Research must be translated Ownership is key Need “enthusiasts” Contextual analysis Credibility Provide leadership Develop integration

29

Types of Questions We Plan to Address for SMHP

Assessment questionsincl. key subgroups

Immediate or proximal impact of program components

Ultimate impact of program components

29

30

Types of Data

Basic Descriptive Data Campus Infrastructure Prevention & Early Intervention Activities Basic Outcome Data

30

31

Sources of Data

Training Surveys Kognito Online Training Survey Training and Technical Assistance (TTA) Survey (CARS-developed) CCC Campus Training Survey (RAND-developed) RSF Survey and materials (RAND-developed)

Pre/Post Comparison Surveys Capacity Survey of Mental Health Services (PIRE-developed) ACHA/NCHA Survey CalMHSA Higher Education Student Survey (RAND + PIRE-

developed) CalMHSA Higher Education Faculty/Staff Survey (RAND-developed)

Regular Reporting (CBGs only) Monthly Progress Report Quarterly Report

31

32

EXAMPLES OF DATA COLLECTED TO DATE

33

Campus Climate for Specific Groups of Interest: Faculty Veterans Students At Risk On Campus At Risk M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Students with physical disabilities 4.4 (0.8) 4.2 (0.8) 4.3 (0.9) Students with mental health issues 3.9 (0.9) 3.7 (1.1) 4.1 (1.0) Women students 4.7 (0.7) 4.5 (0.8) 4.5 (0.8) Racial/ethnic minority students 4.5 (0.8) 4.3 (1.0) 4.5 (0.9) LGBT students 4.3 (0.9) 4.2 (1.0) 4.3 (0.9) Students with different relig. beliefs and backgrounds 4.3 (0.9) 4.3 (0.9) 4.3 (0.9) Student Veterans 4.6 (0.7) 4.2 (0.8) 4.5 (0.9)

1=hostile, 2=somewhat hostile, 3=neutral, 4=somewhat welcoming, 5=welcoming

Kognito On-line Training Survey

34

Training & Technical Assistance

Training & Technical Assistance Topic Areas (N=337 TTA Assignments)

TTA assignment (n= 337)

Topic Areas N (%) a 11% or more of TTA Assignments

1. Campus outreach and awareness of resources 130 (39%) 2. Campus consultation, needs assessment, TTA identification 100 (30%) 3. CBG support 47 (14%) 4. Outreach and marketing to external/internal partners 40 (12%) 5. Culturally competent service delivery (e.g. targeting Asian/Pacific Islanders,

LGBT, foster youth and other underserved populations) 38 (11%)

5% to 9% of TTA Assignments

6. Student mental health training and awareness (e.g. identification & referral) 30 (9%) 7. Regional strategizing forum (planning, implementation, or facilitation) 29 (9%) 8. Campus dissemination and sharing resources with each other 26 (8%) 9. Threat assessment (planning development and implementation) 16 (5%) 10. Building campus infrastructure 18 (5%)

35

Quarterly Reporting ToolProgress on Major Activities: Number of Campuses Reporting a Lot of Progress or Nearly/Fully Complete, by Quarterly Reporting Period

0 5 10 15 20

System for campus threat assessment

Leveraging MH services resources

Increasing P-to-P opportunities

Campus-wide assessment of need

Collaboration with other campuses

Establishment of ID/referral system

Developing resources

Providing suicide prevention training

Relationships with county MH

Providing mental health training

Q1

Q2

Q3

36

Capacity Survey (baseline)

Structure on Campus for Mental Health Services (Q2) Does your campus have a health center on campus that provides mental health services? (valid n = 75)

Response # Valid %

No 8 11

Yes, mental health services are provided within a health center 48 64

Yes, mental health services are provided within a separate mental health center 15 20

Does not have a health or mental health center that provides services, but has another office on campus that faculty, staff or students would contact related to student mental health issues or concerns

4 5

37

Capacity Survey (baseline)

Types of Mental Health Services Present at Baseline (Q3) As of July 1, 2012, did your campus provide or support the following mental health services (valid n ranged from 72 to 75)

Response (abbreviated in some cases) % Yes

a) System in place for staff to refer students of concern to needed mental health services

89

b) Faculty / staff / student suicide prevention gatekeeper training 37 c) Suicide prevention policies 32 d) Threat assessment protocols 41 e) Stigma & discrimination reduction activities related to accessing mental health

services 52

f) Mental health service resources available on college website 80

38

Capacity Survey (baseline)

Categories of staff who provide mental health services to students (valid n = 28 to 52) (Q13) Of all staff on your campus who provide mental health services to students, how many fall within each of the following categories Average

Number of respondents who reported this type

Number of psychiatrists or other licensed prescribers 0.8 31

Number of full-time mental health counselors/therapists 0.6 36

Number of part-time mental health counselors/therapists 3.4 51

Number of mental health counseling interns 2.6 52

Number of nurses 3.0 50

Number of other types of staff 1.6 28

SNAPSHOT OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

MARCH 18, 2011REVISED JANUARY 29, 2013

Becky Perelli, RN, MS

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT OUR STUDENTS? Health Services Association of California Community Colleges

ACHA-NCHA II 2010 Consortium Project

41

ACHA – NCHAAmerican College Health AssociationNational College Health Assessment

The ACHA-National College Health Assessment (NCHA) is a nationally recognized research survey that can assist us in collecting precise data about students’ health habits, behaviors, and perceptions and covers a wide range of health issues -

Alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use Sexual health Weight, nutrition, and exercise Mental health Personal safety and violence

42

ACHA – NCHAAmerican College Health AssociationNational College Health Assessment

Since spring 2000 > 825,000 students/550+ colleges and universities across the country have taken the survey.

Used by two- and four-year public and private institutions from varied geographical regions, Carnegie Foundation Classifications, and campus settings.

43

• North N=7• Central

N=3• South

N=4

Participating CCC Campuses

Spring 2010

44

ACHA-NCHA IIHSACCC Consortium – Spring 2010

14 Colleges N = 11,386 Students F 52.7% M 41.6% Tr 0.3% Av Age - 24.20 Age >24 – 26% Part time status – 30.5% Live w/Parent/guardian –

64.4% Work hours for pay – 61.2

%

45

ETHNICITY

ACHA-NCHA Cohort

White 39.4%

Black – not Hispanic 4.3%

Hispanic/Latino(a) 26.4%

Asian/Pacific Islander 20.7%

American Indian/

Alaskan Native/

Native Hawaiian 1.9%

Biracial/Multiracial 5.1%

Other 5.7%

STATEWIDE

White31%

African American7%

Hispanic30%

Asian 11%

Pacific Islander0.5%

Filipino 3%

American Indian/Alaskan

Native 0.5%

Multiracial 1%

Unknown 16%

46

MENTAL HEALTH OF CCC STUDENTS

47

Top 10 Factors CCC Students ReportImpact Academic Performance

0

10

20

30

48

Mental Health Experience anytime in last 12 Months

Overwhelmed 72.8% Exhausted (not physical activity) 69.0 Very Sad 57.3 Very Lonely 50.7 Hopeless 48.4 Overwhelming Anxiety 43.7 Overwhelming Anger 43.3 So Depressed difficult to function 33.9 Seriously considered suicide 8.2 Intentionally injured self 7.4 Attempted suicide 2.6

49

Mental Health Experienceanytime in last 12 months

Traumatic/Difficult to Handle

Diagnosed or Treated by Prof.

Anxiety 9.4% Depression 9.4% Panic Attacks 5.1 Insomnia 4.9 ADHD 3.7

010203040

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CCC HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES?

HSACCC Annual Survey 2012-2013

51

HSACCC Annual Survey 2012-2013

34 colleges participated Data on seven major areas of query

Demographics Compliance Funding Stability Professional Staffing Scope of Services Outcome Measurement Mental Health Services

52

Scope of Services

70% of colleges have an internship training program as part of their mental health services

Of the mental health interns working in community colleges, 30% of them receive pay for their work

MFT; 52.0%LCSW,

15.0%

Pre/Post- Doc Psyc

h, 41.0%

Mental Health

53

Scope of Services

35% report providing SBIRT services Screening, Brief

Intervention, Referral and Treatment for Alcohol and Other Drug use

11% offer on-line alcohol education tools

35% offer on-line mental health screening

82% reported having a Behavioral Intervention Team

61% have well-defined policies and Threat Assessment protocol

Top 4 Functions – Faculty & staff consultations Receiving, responding to &

tracking reports Staff development trainings &

workshops Facilitating meetings with

students in distress

Drug & Alcohol ProgramsBehavioral Intervention Teams

Mental Health Services

96% Individual Therapy

93% CMH Referrals 89% Crisis Drop-in

Visits 81% Classroom

Presentations

71% of Colleges Total

Unduplicated Visits

6800 Students

Services Provided Respondents Reporting Average Number of Visits

Respondents – 27 of 34 Colleges (21% did not respond)

OPPORTUNITIES………

GOAL: STUDENT SUCCESSHSACCC Consortium - ACHA-NCHA II SP2010

57

LUNCH

MOVING TOWARDS ACTION

Finalize the Letter of Support

Sustainability: What Are We Hoping is on the Long-term

Horizon?

o What are feasible long-term goals for the COAGSMH?

o What is feasible to sustain for the CCC system?

o What are the strategies to achieve?

o What are the next steps?

59

60

The Journey Continues

Summary

Next Steps

Agenda Items