DHS APD Consumer-Employer Provider ...

Department of Human Services

Consumer-Employer Provider Program Needs Immediate Action to Ensure In-Home Care

Consumers Receive Required Care and Services

February 2019 Report 2019-05

Secretary of State Dennis Richardson Audits Division Director Kip Memmott

This page intentionally left blank

February 2019

Department of Human Services

Consumer-Employer Provider Program Needs Immediate Action to Ensure InHome Care Consumers Receive Required Care and Services

Recommendation Follow-up Results

At the time of the original audit, the Department of Human Services (DHS) fully agreed with 10 recommendations we made and partially agreed with one recommendation. Our follow-up work shows DHS has fully implemented four of those recommendations since the initial report. While the agency has made progress, significant work is needed to implement the remaining seven recommendations. Resolving these recommendations will help improve the safety and well-being of the older adults and people with disabilities who participate in the program.

Highlights from the Original Audit

The Secretary of State's Audits Division found that the Aging and People with Disabilities (APD) program should take immediate action to address gaps in program design and oversight in order to improve the safety and wellbeing of participants in the Consumer-Employed Provider (CEP) program.

Background

Oregon adopted an innovative, dignified approach to in-home care for older adults and people with disabilities. The most used in-home care program is the CEP program, which positions consumers as employers of their homecare worker.

Purpose

The purpose of the audit was to assess the policies and processes used by APD to ensure the needs of consumers in the CEP program are met. The purpose of this follow-up report is to provide a status on the auditee's efforts to implement the report recommendations.

Key Findings from the Original Audit

The effectiveness of the CEP program is dependent on the consumer, the case manager, and the homecare worker. If each is capable, competent, and supported in their role, the model can be successful. Our audit found:

1. Some consumers are not receiving the support necessary to ensure required employer duties are being performed, which adds to case managers' and homecare workers' responsibilities.

2. Case managers are not consistently contacting consumers, or monitoring services consumers receive, due to excessive workloads.

3. Agency requirements do not ensure that homecare workers are prepared to provide the care and assistance consumers need.

4. Due to current data collection and utilization practices, it is difficult for APD to determine if consumers are safe and receiving the care and services they need.

5. Current deficiencies in the program may put consumers' health and well-being at risk and keep the program from operating as intended.

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to follow up on the recommendations we made to the Department of Human Services (DHS) as included in audit report 2017-23, "Consumer-Employer Provider Program (CEP) Needs Immediate Action to Ensure In-Home Care Consumers Receive Required Care and Services."

The Oregon Audits Division conducts follow-up procedures for each of our performance audits. This process helps assess the impact of our audit work, promotes accountability and transparency within state government, and ensures audit recommendations are implemented and related risks mitigated to the greatest extent possible. We use a standard set of procedures for these engagements that includes gathering evidence and assessing the efforts of the auditee to implement our recommendations; concluding and reporting on those efforts; and employing a rigorous quality assurance process to ensure our conclusions are accurate. Implementation status determinations are based on an assessment of evidence rather than self-reported information. To ensure the timeliness of this effort, the division asks all auditees to provide a timeframe for implementing the recommendations in our audit reports. We use this timeframe to schedule and execute our follow-up procedures. Our follow-up procedures evaluate the status of each recommendation and assign it one of the following categories:

? Implemented/Resolved: The auditee has fully implemented the recommendation or otherwise taken the appropriate action to resolve the issue identified by the audit.

? Partially implemented: The auditee has begun taking action on the recommendation, but has not fully implemented it. In some cases, this simply means the auditee needs more time to fully implement the recommendation. However, it may also mean the auditee believes it has taken sufficient action to address the issue and does not plan to pursue further action on that recommendation.

? Not implemented: The auditee has taken no action on the recommendation. This could mean the auditee still plans to implement the recommendation and simply has not yet taken action; it could also mean the auditee has declined to take the action identified by the recommendation and may pursue other action, or the auditee disagreed with the initial recommendation.

The status of each recommendation and full results of our follow-up work are detailed in the following pages.

Oregon Secretary of State | Report 2019-05 | February 2019 | Page 1

Recommendation Implementation Status

Recommendation

Auditee Action

Status

1. Train case managers to recognize when consumers need additional assistance in completing employer responsibilities.

The Adults and People with Disabilities (APD) Division of DHS has developed and implemented a training for case managers. In January 2018, APD offered the training to all case managers. Moving forward, the training will be presented on a quarterly basis to all new case managers.

Implemented/ Resolved

2. Develop and implement procedures for taking action when consumers are no longer able or willing to perform necessary employer duties.

APD revised OAR 411-030-0040(8) (In home service rule) and OAR 411-034-0040(4) (State Plan Personal Care or SPPC) to add procedures for taking action when consumers are no longer able or willing to perform employer duties. These procedures have been in place since December 28, 2017.

Implemented/ Resolved

3. Monitor consumer care to ensure direct and indirect contacts are occurring according to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services requirements and Oregon Administrative Rules.

APD has developed a corrective action process to ensure direct and indirect contacts are being made. Central office staff monitor monthly consumer contact data and communicate with local field offices when they are out of compliance. Local field offices must respond and make corrections to ensure contacts occur.

Implemented/ Resolved

4. Utilize APD's current risk assessment tool to identify consumers most at risk for fraud, neglect, and abuse.

Case managers currently use APD's risk assessment tool and must document that an assessment was completed in the OR ACCESS database before a service plan is created for a consumer.

A refresher course on current policy was presented by APD to case managers in November 2018.

Implemented/ Resolved

ADP plans to make revisions to its risk assessment policy so that it aligns with a new risk-based monitoring and tracking system.

Oregon Secretary of State | Report 2019-05 | February 2019 | Page 2

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download