FY 15-16 Scorecard Performance Criteria - CFBHN
Scoring Tool Sub-contractor Performance CriteriaFor a July 1, 2015 effective dateCompliance InitiativesBenchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved for the current Fiscal year - Critical: 0None of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved2Between .01% & 10% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved4Between 10.01% & 20% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved6Between 20.01% & 30% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved8Between 30.01% & 40% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved10Between 40.01% & 50% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved12Between 50.01% & 60% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved14Between 60.01% & 70% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved16Between 70.01% & 80% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved18Between 80.01% & 90% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved20Between 90.01% & 100% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achievedBenchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved for the current Fiscal year – Non Critical: 0None of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved1Between .01% & 10% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved2Between 10.01% & 20% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved3Between 20.01% & 30% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved4Between 30.01% & 40% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved5Between 40.01% & 50% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved6Between 50.01% & 60% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved7Between 60.01% & 70% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved8Between 70.01% & 80% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved9Between 80.01% & 90% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achieved10Between 90.01% & 100% of the benchmark and quality of enhancement measures achievedConsumer Sub-contractor satisfaction survey for Adults. Average score achieved on the 10 selected questions divided by the maximum score that can be achieved:0No Surveys returned or Zero % on the Survey Results1.01% to 20.99% on the Survey Results221% to 40.99% on the Survey Results341% to 60.99% on the Survey Results461% to 80.99% on the Survey Results5Above 81% on the Survey ResultsConsumer Sub-contractor satisfaction survey for Children. Average score achieved on the 9 selected questions divided by the maximum score that can be achieved.0No Surveys returned or Zero % on the Survey Results1.01% to 20.99% on the Survey Results221% to 40.99% on the Survey Results341% to 60.99% on the Survey Results461% to 80.99% on the Survey Results5Above 81% on the Survey ResultsAccreditation of all DCF funded programs in effect by a CMS-Approved Accreditation Organizations; or meeting the CARF non-accredited requirements as determined by CFBHN accrediting manual and monitoring tool. Any new program developed after accreditation is held harmless.0Not accredited by an accrediting organization and scoring below 82% on the non-accredited criteria on the CFBHN monitoring tool 3Not accredited by an accrediting organization and scoring 82% or above on the non-accredited provider criteria on the CFBHN monitoring tool 4Received a partial or conditional accreditation by an accrediting organization or not accredited and scoring 88% or above on the non-accredited provider criteria on the CFBHN monitoring tool5Received a full accreditation from an accrediting organization (CARF, COA, Joint Commission etc.) or not accredited and scoring 94% or above on the non-accredited provider criteria on the CFBHN monitoring toolSubmitted required documents as list in the current year’s Exhibit A by the due date:0None of the due dates are met1Between .01% and 20% of the due dates are met2Between 20.01% and 40% of the due dates are met3Between 40.01% and 60% of the due dates are met4Between 60.01% and 80% of the due dates are met5Between 80.01% and 100% of the due dates are metUnearned contracted funding (Lapse funding), without notification to the contract manager. 0Funding was lapsed after April 15 of the current contract year without notification1Funding was not lapsed after April 15 of the current contract yearData: 95% of Substance Abuse consumers (except Methadone and Prevention) shall be discharged within 120 of the last service.0Between 0.00% and 84.99% of consumers discharged1Between 85.00% and 89.99% of consumers discharged2Between 90.00% and 94.99% of consumers discharged3Between 95.00% and 100.00% of consumers dischargedData: 95% of Mental Health consumers shall be discharged within 210 days of the last service.0Between 0.00% and 84.99% of consumers discharged1Between 85.00% and 89.99% of consumers discharged2Between 90.00% and 94.99% of consumers discharged3Between 95.00% and 100.00% of consumers dischargedIndependent Auditor’s Report, Financial Statement Opinion for the last Exhibit A report required fiscal year ended: Less than $500,000 funding no audit from auditing firm is required. If outside audit is not completed highest possible score is 3:0Adverse Opinion “do not present fairly”1No Audit submitted at the time of scoring2Disclaimer of Opinion3Unaudited Financial Statements presented – (Internal Audit)4Qualified Opinion with exception “present fairly … except (major)5Qualified Opinion with exception “present fairly … except (minor)6Unqualified Opinion “present fairly”Independent Auditor’s Report, Internal Control and Compliance for the last Exhibit A report required fiscal year ended: 0Unaudited Financial Statements presented1Material Weakness identified by the Independent Auditor2Deficiency(ies) identified by the Independent Auditor3No deficiencies identified by the Independent AuditorIndependent Auditor’s Report, Compliance with requirements on each Major Federal Program and State Project for the last Exhibit A report required fiscal year ended: 0Unaudited Financial Statements presented1Did not comply with the requirements as noted in the opinion by the Independent Auditor2Complied in all material respects as noted in the opinion by the Independent AuditorApproved 09/18/2014 QI Committee MeetingApproved 11/20/2014 QI Committee MeetingApproved 02/27/2015 Board of DirectorsApproved 06/18/2015 QI Board Committee Meeting – Changed Lapse points; removed Admin Rate measure; removed funding per individual measure – all approved; Data measure not approved.Presented 08/28/2015 to CFBHN Board of Directors – Board sent back to QI to have Data item finalized before approving all items.Presented 09/17/2015 QI Board Committee Meeting – Added New Data Item; Removed three placeholders for Corrective Action monitoring.Approved 09/25/2015 Board of DirectorsApproved 04/21/2016 by Board QI – Adjustment to Accreditation measure; addition of SA and MH Data measures.Presenting 05/27/2016 to Board of Directors – No May BOD meeting.Presenting 06/24/2016 to Board of Directors – All Changes to adjust Accreditation measure add SA and MH Data measures approved.{020EEA0B-76E2-453B-8FE0-1DC59385D4BF}&InitialTabId=Ribbon%2EDocument&VisibilityContext=WSSTabPersistence ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- 16 1 chapter 15 capital structure basic
- software evaluation scorecard template
- amazon balanced scorecard analysis
- amazon balanced scorecard report
- ups balanced scorecard report
- wells fargo balanced scorecard report
- scorecard rewards merchandise catalog
- credit union scorecard rewards
- free golf scorecard app
- m17 scorecard army
- scorecard rewards browse catalog
- m4 scorecard da form