1 / 5

COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES

This document discusses the evolution of combining vendor Financial/Employer Agent (F/EA) services and support services in New Jersey's Personal Preference program. Initially separated in 1999 for distinct functionality, the combination in 2006 aimed at enhancing communication and oversight, simplifying participant navigation. While the merge improved efficiency, it raised concerns about reduced participant choice and the risk of service continuity. It highlights that expectations must be clearly defined between state agencies and vendors to ensure effective advocacy and service delivery.

elmo-osborne
Télécharger la présentation

COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES William A. B. Ditto Director, New Jersey Division of Disability Services & Project Director, Personal Preference (NJ Cash & Counseling Program)

  2. COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES SOME HISTORY . . . . . • NJ kept them separate when we began Personal Preference in 1999 • We felt there were benefits to having the two functions performed by different vendors • Over time, we came to see that combining the two made sense • In 2006 re-bid we combined the functions

  3. COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES • PROS • Increased communication between F/EA and counselors • Ease of monitoring and oversight • Less confusing for participants in terms of using the services • Ease of making policy changes • Training and orientation of staff made easier and more efficient

  4. COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES • CONS • Potential of reduced choice for participants • Need to keep F/EA functions and counseling separate • “Double danger” in the event that vendor ceases operations • Program “identity” may appear to rest with F/EA & counseling vendor, not the state agency

  5. COMBINING VENDOR F/EA AND SUPPORT SERVICES • SOME ADDITIONAL POINTS • Participants were not as interested in “choice” as we assumed. • It is better to prohibit the combined F/EA & counseling vendor from the delivery of any direct services • State and vendor must be clear in terms of expectations, performance standards and deliverables and understand that the counselor must sometime also be the “advocate”

More Related