1 / 14

Using GPRA to Improve Services Lessons from Wisconsin

This presentation by Michael Nunley, Ph.D., outlines key strategies to improve service delivery using the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). Drawing on practical experiences from Milwaukee's WIser Choice program, it highlights the integration of client outcomes into management practices. The talk provides valuable advice such as simplifying data collection, utilizing standardized measures, and linking GPRA results to other datasets. Case studies emphasize the importance of tracking service intensity and understanding specific populations, like Hispanic-Latinos, to enhance treatment efficacy and long-term recovery outcomes.

emiko
Télécharger la présentation

Using GPRA to Improve Services Lessons from Wisconsin

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. Using GPRA to Improve ServicesLessons from Wisconsin SAMHSA Strategic Planning for Providers to Improve Business Practices October 2009, Arlington, VA Michael Nunley, Ph.D. Coordinator of Research and Evaluation Milwaukee County Behavioral Health Division

  2. Eight points in this presentation • Two philosophical points • Four bits of practical advice • Two examples

  3. Milwaukee WIser Choice • 2500-3000 clients/year • 15% Specific Corrections Populations (Reentry, Alternative to Revocation, Pre-Trial Diversion, Milwaukee County Drug Court) • 85% “General Population” (45% Criminal Justice-involved) • 3 CIUs (+ Drug Court CIU) • 5 Recovery Support Coordinator Agencies(+ Drug Court RSC) • 43 Clinical Treatment Providers • 66 Non-clinical Recovery Support Service Providers

  4. Program Evaluation Process

  5. Two philosophical points • Client outcomes should be integrated into ALL system management • Follow-Up GPRA offers the best outcomes data available

  6. Four bits of practical advice

  7. Four bits of practical advice • Keep it Simple • NOMs offers good minimal set • Run Regular Quarterly Reports • Avoid Ad-hoc analyses • Tie GPRA Results to Other Data • Show Change with Rolling Data

  8. Milwaukee WIser Choice

  9. First Example:Intensity of Day Treatment

  10. First Example:Intensity of Day Treatment

  11. First Example:Intensity of Day Treatment • Conclusions • More hours Day Treatment in first 28 daysmay improve long-term recovery • Need to continue to monitor data

  12. Second Example:Hispanic-Latino Ethnicity

  13. Second Example:Hispanic-Latino Ethnicity

  14. Second Example:Hispanic-Latino Ethnicity • Conclusions • Those self-identified as Hispanic-Latino are more likely to have positive factors at intake but improve less after six months • Early drop-out from treatment may be reason

More Related