SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Pinellas Data Collaborative

henrycollins avatar
henrycollins
26 diapositives · 285 Views · Jan 02, 2020

Analysis of Access of Services for Those Dealing with Substance Abuse Diane Haynes, M.A. Ren Chen, M.S. Policy, Services and Research Data Center Mental Health Law & Policy Florida Mental Health Institute University of South Florida 1/21/03. Pinellas Data Collaborative. Introduction.

Pinellas Data Collaborative - slide 1
01 / 26Pinellas Data Collaborative
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Pinellas Data Collaborative
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Analysis of Access of Services for Those Dealing with Substance AbuseDiane Haynes, M.A.Ren Chen, M.S.Policy, Services and Research Data CenterMental Health Law & PolicyFlorida Mental Health InstituteUniversity of South Florida1/21/03 Pinellas Data Collaborative

  2. Introduction • A study looking at individuals with substance abuse problems and patterns of interactions with services and governmental agencies in Pinellas County

  3. Topics of Discussion • Recap criteria of identification • Today’s Presentation • Cluster Analysis • Four Groups Identified • Findings

  4. Criteria of Identification • Medicaid, DSS, & EMS : • Alcohol and/or Substance Abuse diagnosis • CJIS: Had at least two arrest on statutes dealing with DUI, DWI, Under Influence…, Disorderly Intoxication, or Inhalation of harmful chemical substance.

  5. Criteria of Identification cont….. • IDS : • Alcohol and/or Substance Abuse diagnosis • Cost Center of Methadone or Substance Abuse Detox • Program of Adult or Children Substance Abuse • Service Code of Assess DUI/DWI or Day Care/Additions

  6. What method to use? • How to identify patterns across multiple systems? • Why Cluster analysis? • What key information to use?

  7. Why Cluster analysis? • It is a multivariate analysis technique to organize information about variables so that relatively homogenenous groups, or ‘clusters,’ can be formed.

  8. What key information to use? • Variables that will identify patterns of system interactions and intensity of interactions • A variable for each system and then number of times they interact with that particular system

  9. Cluster one: 1,247 individuals Low interaction with EMS system Largest cluster The highest interaction w/ any system was Medicaid and IDS Worst Outcomes: 908 individuals Highest interaction w/any system was with CJIS Low interaction w/service agencies Cluster Three: 363 Individuals They are receiving services from IDS/Medicaid/Child Welfare systems High interaction with Baker Act system Best Outcomes: 120 Individuals Smallest cluster group Low interaction with CJIS system High interaction /IDS,Medicaid, & Child Welfare Four Clusters Identified

  10. Four Clusters Identified

  11. Cluster Demographics

  12. Gender

  13. Race

  14. Age

  15. First System Interaction

  16. Second System

  17. Arrested in FY 2000-2001

  18. Clusters Adults vs Children

  19. Cluster OutcomesAdults vs Children

  20. Conclusions • Individuals mostly only hit one system, so there is significantly low interaction across multiple systems • The cluster analysis identified four distinctly different groups (NOT using individual characteristics), but interestingly there are significant characteristic differences in the individuals between the cluster groups .

  21. Conclusions cont…. • Cluster 1, which is the largest group • Cluster 1 is mostly White adult males who hit CJIS system first and then only a small portion hit MED, IDS as their second system.

  22. Conclusions cont…. • Cluster 2 had the highest proportion of individuals hitting the CJIS system • Cluster 2 had the worst outcomes • Individuals were more likely to be white adult males

  23. Conclusions cont…. • Cluster 3 Individual’s first and second system hits were spread out across all systems • They were slightly older than the individuals in the other clusters, had almost equal proportion of females to males.

  24. Conclusions cont…. • Cluster 4 was the smallest group and did not hit the CJIS system • They were significantly younger than those in the other clusters, and tended to hit MED, IDS, or CW for their first system • Their second system if they had one was either MED, IDS,or DSS • They had better outcomes than the other clusters

  25. Further Questions • Is cluster four just a younger population and in the future will they fall into the other clusters? • What is the cost per individual across each cluster? • Do geographic patterns using Zip Code in GIS • Why do most individuals only hit one system over a three year period, no matter which cluster they are in? How many, and which systems should an individual dealing with Substance Abuse hit?

  26. What’s Next - Options • Continue with these four groups and ask additional questions • Use different methods to identify groups • Chose a cluster and focus further analysis, case review, etc. on individuals