Performance Data Management: Opportunities and Challenges

Lilit TovmasianMame PolitoCalifornia Department of AgingData TeamNovember 2010

Workshop Objectives

1. Increased Importance of Data

2. Data Management Review

3. Future of Data

4. CARS Users Group Discussion

SECTION 1

Increased Importance of Data

Increased Importance of Data

DataInformationKnowledge

Increased Importance of Data

Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 1993

Requires federal agencies and programs to develop long-term Strategic Plans

Requires the publication of an Annual Performance Plans to accompany the budget justification

Requires federal agencies and programs to document results Requires federal agencies and programs to improve performance based

on results

Accountability = Funding

SECTION 2

Data Management Review

Data Management Review

What have we done?

NAPIS SPR Trend

NAPIS SPR Service Summary Highlights – What Questions Does it Raise?

Data Management Review

Service Category Unit Type

1999 2009

% Total Funding

Cost per unit% Total Funding

Cost per unit

Personal Care Hour 1.2% $9.35 0.7% $23.75 Homemaker Hour 2.8% $11.54 1.8% $24.88 Chore Hour 0.6% $20.96 0.1% $83.65 Home Delivered Meals Meal 27.1% $4.73 31.9% $6.85 Adult Day Care/Health Hour 2.8% $7.05 3.9% $13.94 Case Management Hour 3.7% $31.94 4.4% $78.20 Assisted Transportation 1 Way Trip 2.0% $12.54 0.5% $25.42 Congregate Meals Meal 34.2% $6.33 35.3% $9.94 Nutrition Counseling Session per Participant 0.2% $147.59 0.2% $52.21 Transportation 1 Way Trip 2.6% $5.36 2.7% $8.09 Legal Assistance Hour 4.2% $42.50 5.1% $67.96 Nutrition Education Session per Participant 0.5% $22.18 0.6% $4.16 Information and Assistance Contact 3.8% $5.24 3.6% $7.23 Outreach Contact 0.9% $8.26 0.7% $7.29 Other   13.4%   8.5%  

Whom Do We Serve?

*Demographic information is available for only Title III registered clients.

Data Management Review

2009 Demographics:Population

60+Non-Minority

60+Minority 60+

Low Income 60+

Lives Alone 60+

Geo. Isolation60+

California

6,143,524

3,784,681 2,358,843 628,493 1,192,060

346,030

% of Total Population 60+ 100% 62% 38% 10% 19% 6%

Total III Registered Clients *

229,004

115,571 78,928 94,252 90,202 28,748

% of Total III Registered Clients 100% 50% 34% 41% 39% 13%

Data Management Review

Family Caregiver Support Program (Title IIIE) Impact on Caregivers Caring for Elderly

YearTotal Caregivers

Caring for Elderly

Total Grandparents/

Elderly Caregivers Caring for Children

2005 18,622 1,383 2006 20,307 2,467 2007 17,972 1,105 2008 17,860 1,059 2009 11,167 529

Data Management Review

Information Challenges

Systems are more complex Common data issues

Missing Data Underreporting Questionable Fluctuations Not Meeting Reporting

Requirements

Information Challenges Common Data Issue #1 – Missing Data

Missing data in FY 2009 NAPIS SPR

Solutions… Add differentiation between “missing” and “declined to state” fields Ensure intake sheets contain all required data elements Implement evaluation surveys with a component of demographic data

collection

Title III Nutrition and Supportive Services Title III Family Caregiver Support Program

Poverty 20% Caregivers by Relationship 39% Ethnicity 19% Ethnicity 23% Race 15% Race 19% Live Alone 15% Age 15% Rural Status 7% Gender 11% ADLs 6% Rural Status 2% IADLs 6% Gender 3% Age 3%

Information Challenges Common Data Issue #2 – Underreporting

Solutions… Encourage direct data entry as much as possible Investigate the reason behind under-reporting Use available resources to resolve ongoing under-reporting

Information Challenges Common Data Issue #3 – Questionable

Fluctuations

Solutions… Ongoing monitoring of data Ongoing communication with providers, other AAA staff, CDA Understand changes in service levels

Information Challenges Common Data Issue # 4 – Not Meeting Reporting

Requirements

Not collecting all data elements as required by the CARS File Specifications

Not reporting performance data where expenditures have been reported (vice versa)

Solutions… Review the quarterly “CARS Quarterly Error Report” and make necessary

system corrections Review the CARS File Specifications Reference the CARS Overview and Guidance document Review with the AAA Fiscal Officer and Planner which services the AAA

provides

SECTION 3

Future of Data Management

Future of Data Management

Finalizing CARS Guidance Common Concerns

Service Unit Rounding Reporting “Primary” Caregivers

Future of Data Management

Establishing a Data Champion Users Group 10 AAA Champion Users A Diverse Group of AAAs Changing Membership

Future of Data Management

AoA NAPIS SPR changes (July 1, 2011)

Updates to Service Categories and Data Dictionary

CARS modifications

SECTION 4

CARS Users Group Discussion

CARS User Group Discussion

How can we continue to improve performance data collection and reporting across the Aging Services Network?

&

Please remember complete the evaluation form.

Thank You for Your Participation