Quality

The HCBS Work Book is a technical assistance guide to assist state agencies with their HCBS quality improvement efforts. It provides step-by-step guidance on how to conduct quality improvement projects within the HCBS waiver program, and illustrates the principles of quality improvement in an easy to use format. The Work Book was developed for CMS by the Muskie School of Public Service at the University of Southern Maine.

The Participant Experience Surveys (PES) is an interview tool developed by MEDSTAT under a contract from CMS. The surveys capture data that can be used to calculate indicators for monitoring quality within the waiver prograns. Two versions of the PES are included, one for frail elderly and adults with physical disabilities and another for adults with MR/DD. A Users' Guide accompanies each PES. Each survey can be conducted in a face-to-face interview in 30 minutes or less.

In his letter to State Medicaid Directors dated February 17, 2004, Glenn Stanton (Acting Director, DEHPG, CMS) introduces the Quality Inventory Report. The Report summarizes and discusses the results of this first-time nationwide systematic survey of state waiver QA/QI systems. The report also includes recommendations for CMS follow-up. This letter is also referred to as CMS Quality Communication #4.

In this letter to State Medicaid Directors, Glenn Stanton (Acting Director, DEHPG, CMS) describes the modifications made to the HCBS Quality Framework. The modifications emphasize the importance of building quality into the design of HCBS programs. Included here are Mr. Stanton's letter, the final Quality Framework, and a working draft of \"sub-domains\" which provide specificity within each focus area. This letter is also referred to as CMS Quality Communication #3.

Beginning in 2001 and continuing in 2002 and 2003, technical assistance for the Real Choice Systems Change grantees has been provided by the Exchange Collaborative team (combined efforts of ILRU and Rutgers University/CSHP). These documents provide contact information for the TA providers and two charts indicating which Exchange Team is responsible for providing TA to the grantees. In 2002 & 2002, TA was divided according to states. In 2003, TA was distributed according to theme.

This document descibes a project in Idaho that designs and implements a system for delivering quality services that will: Improve the quality of services for people with developmental disabilities and mental illness; Provide the right services, at the right time, in the right setting, in the most cost-effective manner to enhance greater health, promote recovery, self determination, and independence for consumers; Manage the growth of Medicaid spending.

This paper presents findings from the Cash & Counseling demonstration in Arkansas. The report shows results from a survey of 1,739 elderly and nonelderly adults. The results include that relative to agency-directed services, Cash and Counseling greatly improved satisfaction and reduced most unmet needs. Additional results and presented and discussed.

The Aging and Disability Resource Center Grant Program, was developed to assist states in their efforts to create a single, coordinated system of information and access for all persons seeking long term support. This toolbox has been developed for ADRC grantees to: 1) List and succinctly explain the AoA-CMS requirements per each topic, and 2) provide materials that will support the design, development and operation of resource centers.

This report studied assisted living in California, Florida, Ohio and Oregon through mail surveys from assisted living facilities, evaluating marketing materials for clarity and completeness, and interviewing state officials and reviewing state statutes and policy manuals.

A pilot project in southeastern Minnesota has developed a quality assurance approach that focuses on matters important to people receiving supports and their families and provides a means of quality improvement, as opposed to licensing minimum standards. This report is based on an independent evaluation of the project, which used extensive interviews, focus groups and reviews of written materials and project files. The report provides intervention, implementation, and impact information.