Modernization Update - April 2019
Key Highlights This Month:
Modernization update – meeting 4/10/19
Along with MACSSA members who sit on the various committees of the governance structure, we also had guests for a couple of topics.
Modernization Strategic Plan briefing
Guests: Sarah Small, DHS, part of the program and performance area & Crystal Fairchild –DHS, part of Health care administration
They came to provide a review of the status of the Modernization Strategic Plan at our meeting and seek input on the plan from counties. She clarified that it is meant as a guiding document. Not going to wordsmith it much longer, but she welcomes any further comments by April 17th. The EAB is planning a retreat to look at how to use it.
Highlights of the presentation:
- Purpose of the plan - How transform the system
- ISBM and roadmap fall underneath this
- Measurement framework still needs to be developed – how do we know we are successful
- Essential functions we need to do in modernization
- Strategies have been reworked down from 56 to 13. The plan is to have action plans around each strategy.
- Some technology ideas were identified in the ISBM, but clear that we need to do Business Readiness first
- Feedback so far has been mostly positive, people want to move from planning to action
- Getting a glossary of terms to help with level-setting
- EAB has oversight. Next step is for EAB to approve the plan
- Ideas being developed on and implementation framework
- Big tensions between the practical development and prioritization of projects that move integration and advance the modernization planning.
- Would like to see some room for innovation carved out.
Jane recapped the presentation on current status, and reviewed the feedback from the March monthly meeting. The group discussed some different options, but we’re not ready to put forward as a position statement. She will work with Janet Goligowski and Eric.
Conversation with DHS and MNIT
Guests: Greg Poehling, Debra Hauerwas, Wendy Weisner, Roberta Downing, & Jeff Jorgenson (Chuck Johnson wanted to be there but had a last minute conflict).
We invited leaders from MNIT and DHS to talk about the governance structure and discuss whether or not it is the right model and/or if the model could be modified to better allow county members to participate and give meaningful input. We kicked off the conversation by stating why we appreciate being at the table at the various levels of governance and why we care about the modernization work. Our talking points included:
- Appreciate the engagement; strong desire to engage. We want to engage on the things that are commonly important.
- Different systems, there will be tension. We’re ok with that, hope you will be too.
- Our involvement in the structure is not the end of their need to communicate to counties and MACSSA. How can DHS and counties bring messages both ways.
- Adopt agile, human-centered design methodologies.
Highlights of the conversation included:
- From Greg’s perspective, MNIT does feel that the county input at the PMT level has been a huge benefit.
- There is common ground in that DHS staff who have fulltime jobs have similar challenges with the time to participate, and to get grounded in the context in order to do it well. Adding it to a job description and carving out time makes it work.
- The Modernization Strategic plan, when agreed on and embraced, could be a guiding document
- The current governance structure with the new PMTs has only been going since January, so may need more time to mature.
- Willingness to consider trying something different in the future.
- Agreement to work together in the spirit of co-creation regarding the structure, and the end product. Including the people we serve.
Some critical questions to further the discussion were raised.
- What involvement do counties want?
- How do we engage?
- Co-create a solution together for modifying county participation?
- Do we all agree what modernization is?
- Are there different expertise at the different levels – can we restructure to be more effective?
We thoroughly discussed the challenges of the governance structure and the specific issues county reps experience. The state staff agreed and some said they had similar concerns about the ability for state staff to participate. All felt the discussion was valuable and worth more discussion with the possible outcome of modifying how counties (and maybe others) provide input.
Next step, a couple MACSSA reps will meet with Jeff Jorgenson and Debra Hauerwas to plan an additional meeting.
Requested Actions needed from MACSSA in the next month:
We continue to discuss what our METS position should be. If anyone has insights, suggestions or questions about this item, please reach out Marti Fischbach or Brad Vold and we will get you connected with the right person and/or take your input.
New Trends in this area:
The state is making progress on the strategic plan.
Issues/Concerns regarding this topic this month:
Going through some growing pains with regards to know that we are being included in so much of the governance structure, how do we find the capacity to fill all of the roles.
There are some financial limitations that may inform future legislative needs
Supporting materials :
Marti Fischbach – Modernization Co-Lead; IHSM ESC Co-chair
Brad Vold – Modernization Co – Lead; BADT member
Jane Hardwick, Stephanie Radtke, Chris Lancrete - EAB