Grants Administration Process Overview Jim Pearsol May 17,2010

To protect and improve the Public’s health The customer is the public Create a robust business partnership across the

entire enterprise Standardize and simply processes wherever and

whenever possible Consider: Who? What? When? Where? Why? and

How? Potential benefits: reduce waste, eliminate

duplication, save time, improve performance, better documentation of success and improved health outcomes, and an opportunity to celebrate

Common components of a grants administration process

Key control points Examples of incentives Examples of tactical options New developments on the horizon State examples (OH, MI and IA)

Federal Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA)

Federal application process: federal forms, state clearinghouse forms, assurances, program and fiscal approvals and signatures, budget and personnel review and approvals, final sign-off and submission

Receipt of federal NOA: special conditions, loading into state systems (budget and acct’g), federal grant modifications (approvals and spending plans)

Subgrantee RFP*: creation of RFP – program and fiscal elements, subgrantee eligibility requirements (notice to subgrantees?), final sign-offs, release of RFP, standardized elements?

Subgrantee Application*: Receipt of RFP, preparation of narrative and fiscal elements, review and sign-off steps, submission of application, notice of receipt of application

* Can these run concurrently with any prior steps?

Internal grants management process (from receipt of subgrantee application to approval and NOA):

review of applications – narrative and budget special conditions* non-selected and selected applicant reviews,

approvals, and signoffs preparation of purchase requisition and cover

letter, filing of entire package into a project folder

(master file?)

*including any outstanding audit issues?

Purchase order process:

Purchase order prepared and cross-checked with approved application

Send NOA and package to subgrantee Prepare payment transmittal form Accounting assures cash is available Disburse initial funds

(how is this done in CO?)

Subgrantee responsibilities:

Compliance with any special conditions Implementation of PH program Submission of required fiscal and program

documentation (procedures? time frames?) Local oversight and/or fiscal procedures Annual reconciliation reports Audits required by law

Federal/state health agency program and fiscal monitoring responsibilities:

Implementation of PH program Site visits and reports Desk reviews and reports Failure to comply (consequences) Budget modification processes* - fiscal limits

and how often in a grant period, “no cost” extensions, changes in scope or amount of award, etc.

* a “hidden,” complicating element of a GAP

Completion of required reports and closeouts:

Interim FSR Close-out procedures Return of unused funds Final FSR Failure to comply (consequences)

Documentation of certifications (SHA to federal and subgrantee to SHA)

Director’s approvals Award matches request Elimination of fiscal exceptions (management

overrides and straight debits for payments to subgrantees)

Documentation of compliance with deadlines (applications/NOAs/budget revisions/etc)

Documentation of compliance with special conditions

Documentation of compliance with final closeout

One-time submission of certifications

Standard RFP format

Standard project reporting elements

Earned budget flexibility after meeting defined compliance criteria

Create flowchart, with documentation, of GAP Create a GAP policies and procedures manual

for both internal and external audiences Create a standardized master file for all

subgrant project folders (electronic preferred) Implement a comprehensive, ongoing internal

and external GAP training program Establish a minimum dollar threshold for

subgrants Establish a robust subgrantee audit program

ASTHO/CDC joint project on improving grant processes (BSIP)

ARRA grant requirements

Fiscal intermediaries

Health reform funding

PHAB fiscal standards and measures

Consistent and more flexible carry-over policy

Standardize no cost extensions and budget modifications

Reduce the degree of detail in budget submission requirements

Standardize data and reporting element requirements

Eliminate IT “stand alones”

Standardize, or at least simplify, project period/budget period start dates

Transparent performance tracking process Standardize minimum lead time for preparing

applications in response to grant guidance Specify Business Process Metrics and Key

Sign-offs Timely issuance of grant/cooperative

agreement guidance including ample time for application preparation and submission

Don’t combine (or mask) budget cuts with integration

Reduce variation and differences in “rule interpretations” by PGO, programs and states

Create standard applications, invoicing and reporting

Clarify and standardize maintenance of effort and match requirements

real-time transparent process for tracking status of requests

Confirm agency assurances once annually Create a means for tracking expenditures –

more refined than timing of state “drawdowns.”

Track performance on outcomes rather than on processes

Keep track of categorical funds but allocate to states in a blended fashion when appropriate

Initiate an appeals process

Link any expansion of program requirements (mid grant) with an associated increase in funding

Conduct proactive needs assessments from state and local partners

Workloads and expectations should be more commensurate with funding levels

Explore the possibility of multi-year grants Simplify the continuation process Expand the allowable spending period beyond

the prescribed 12 month budget period

Provide Financial Management Systems Standard A2 B: Establish effective financial

management systems. A2.1 B: Comply with requirements for externally

funded programs ◦ Audited financial statements ◦ Program reports

A2.2 B: Maintain written agreements with entities providing processes, programs and/or interventions delegated or purchased by the public health agency◦ Two examples of current written contracts/MOUs, MOAs

for processes, programs and/or interventions

A2.3 B: Maintain financial management systems

Examples of Documentation◦ Annual agency budget approved by governing entity ◦ Two examples of financial reports (at least quarterly) ◦ Audited financial statements

Other Examples of Documentation ◦ Documentation that audit has been reviewed by the

governing entity and/or key agency staff ◦ Documentation that financial reports reviewed by the

governing entity and/or key agency staff

A2.4 B: Seek resources to support agency infrastructure and processes, programs and interventions

Examples of documentation ◦ Annual budget submission ◦ Budget revisions ◦ Additional funding requests ◦ Grant applications and fundraising ◦ Newspaper articles/letters to the editor on the need for

improvement in public health (can be issues specific) ◦ Public Health meeting discussing public health funding

For more information:

http://www.phaboard.org/assets/documents/PHABStateJuly2009-finaleditforbeta.pdf

Thank [email protected]

Comprehensive GAP policy and procedures manual

http://www.odh.ohio.gov/pdf/GAPManual/GAPMANUAL.PDF

“A-Z” list of recommended changes

Kaizen Blitz to streamline process

Department of Community Health (State Health Agency)

Department of Environmental Health (Water, Sewage, Campgrounds, and Swimming Pool Programs)

Department of Agriculture (Food Service Safety Programs)

By state statute the State Health Agency is responsible for the provision of health services to Michigan Citizens

Statute provides the State Health Agency the option to grant local health departments authority to act on its behalf for primary responsibility and delivery of public health services to Michigan Citizens

The State Health Agency has exercised this option

State Statute requires each county to provide for a county health department

The legal local governing entity in Michigan is defined as a county

45 local health departments serving Michigan’s 83 counties and the city of Detroit:

30 are single county departments 14 are multiple county district Health

departments 1 city health department 37 of the 45 local health departments are

classified as rural health departments

Boards of Health are optional except where there is a district health department

District boards of health are comprised of two elected officials (commissioners) from each county in the district

CPBC is a contractual agreement between the State Health Agency and each of the 45 local health departments

The contract is the administrative and legal mechanism through which categorical grants and other funds are disbursed or allocated to fund required services

The contract contains the majority of State Health Agency funded programs including those administered by the Departments of Environmental Quality and Agriculture

The 45 CPBC agreements collectively contained 62 local health service programs and funding of $101,623.860

Contains Six Components 1) Boilerplate Parts I 2) Boilerplate Parts II 3) Budget-includes instructions, standard

budget forms, amendment process 4) Output Reporting – H-977-contains

output measures for specific programs as established by program staff

5) Special Requirements-includes Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs), check off list, special requirements that do not have MPRs

6) Allocation Schedule-contains allocations, defines programs as staff, fixed unit rate, performance, and includes performance measures

Each program has a budget, performance indicators, and reporting requirements

Standard forms are used for all programs and are itemized by program then rolled up to a combined budget

When possible reporting requirements are redefined as Minimum Reporting Requirements (MPRs)

Special reporting requirements are contained in a Special Reporting Section of the agreement

The very extensive reporting requirements continue to be a barrier to moving from standardization to true contract consolidation

February-Previous agreements sent to MDCH Programs for review by MDCH Grants and Purchasing Division

March-Revised agreements returned to Grants and Purchasing Division

April-Final revised agreements returned to Programs for approval

April-Approved agreements returned to Grants and Purchasing Division

May-New agreements for all programs mailed out to local health department

June-August-Local health department obtains County or BOH approval

September-Signed agreements returned to Grants and Contracts Division

October – start new fiscal year

Local health departments are reimbursed monthly at 1/12 of planned/approved budget amount

Local health departments submit quarterly financial status reports (FSRs) detailing funds expended

Local health departments submit an estimated FSR for the last quarter (July,Aug,Sept.)

Submit final adjusted actual FSR report by January 31.

Local health department may request advance operating funds through a formal process

All forms (FSR, Budget, Medicaid Cost-based reimbursement forms in spreadsheet format)

Best practice guidelines Instructions for completing forms Instructions for completing local

maintenance of effort reports Calendar of due dates Contact directory

* a procedures manual

Grants and Contracts Division, MDCH-Serves as a connector between programs and local health departments, ensure schedules are kept, performs financial reviews, generates payments

Office of Local Health Services, MDCH-Serves as the single point of contact for local health departments to reach any part of MDCH. Staffs the annual standards review and funding formula local/state committees

Program Divisions-Performs program reviews, approves/doesn’t process payments

Top Leadership Commitment-Three state department directors meet quarterly with local health department leadership to deal with policy and financial issues

Principles of Collaboration Agreement-signed by three state department directors and the leadership of local public health pledging to work together in a collaborative manner on all issues relating to the provision of public health services to Michigan citizens

Information Technology-Active sharing of hardware, software, networking, and technical resources by and between local health departments, especially important to smaller local health departments

Local Resource Sharing-Local health departments not big fans of formal consolidation of local health departments but do utilize an associated contractual arrangement where local health departments share resources, people, technology.

The associated contractual relationship allows resource sharing but each county retains its own governing entity, budget, and organization.

MI state accreditation provides the final piece of the Standardized contractual relationship between the state and local health departments.

MI accreditation uses the same MPRs Site visits once every 3 years replaces

annual individual program reviews including the WIC management evaluation

Affords an opportunity for program staff and local health department staff to interact on a regular basis in a positive collaborative way.

Thank you!

Iowa Department of Public Health

Service ContractingKaizen EventReport Out“Contract Transformers” November 2-6, 2009

The “Contract Transformers” TeamJody

50

Cheryl Christie-DPH, Bruce Brown-DPH, Kathi Nelson Hancock, John McMullen-DPH,Sherry Frizell-DPH,Sheri Stursma-DPH,Stacey Hewitt-DPH, Dawn MouwDPH, Mindy Uhle-DPH,Doreen Christensen-Cerro Gordo, Mark Vander Linden-DPH, Erin Barkema-DPH, Tim Wickam-DPH,Diana Von Stein-DPH, Jody Lane-Molnari-DHS, Chris Everson, MN Marcia Tope-DHS, Mike Rohlf-DM,

Insert team picture here

ScopeDawn

This event will address the service contracting process from when the Iowa Department of Public Health program initiates the writing of the competitive selection document to the date the fully executed contract is sent to the contractor.

51

GoalsSherry

1. Decrease time from application deadline to contract signature by 50%

2. Contract issued to contractor a minimum of 30 days prior to start date

3. Reduce steps in the internal review process by 50%4. Eliminate duplication of core information from each

provider for different applications by fiscal year 2011 contracts

5. Meeting established timeline 100%

52

ObjectivesSheri1. A stream-lined process that improves efficiency and

timeliness 2. Strengthen relationships with our internal and external

customers3. Standardized expectations for the internal and external

customers4. Standardized terminology and formats across programs5. Improve communication with external and internal

customers regarding process and responsibilities (including training)

6. Establish timeline of RFP/contract process from start to finish

7. Establish accountability

53

Clear objectives Team process Tight focus on time Quick & simple Necessary resources immediately available Immediate results (new process designed by end of week) 5S “mindset”--use the steps to support the event activities

Sort, Set in order, Shine, Standardize, Sustain

54

Kaizen Methodology Marcia

Current ProcessTim

55

Insert picture of current process here

BrainstormingMark

Establish accountability Eliminate Document Review Define roles and responsibilities Increase use of technology Establish clear timelines Standardization of forms and processes Training (internal and external) Improved communication (internal/external)

56

New ProcessCheryl

57

Insert picture of new process here

ResultsDiana

58

CURRENT Tobacco Behavioral Health HPCDP ADPER

Total Steps 188 214 194 218

Total Delays 11 14 11 11

Average (BC) Delay Time – Days (WC)

25 40 25 25

262 302 262 262

Value Added Steps

5 5 5 5

Decisions 12 16 13 20

Loop Backs 3 3 3 3

Total Handoffs 63 82 86 77

Lead Time - Days

315.5 314 313 307

ResultsErin

59

Current New % Change

Total Steps 814 120 85%

Total Delays 47 8 83%

Average Delay Time - Days

115 Nm nm%

1,088 nm nm%

Value Added Steps

8 3 63%

Decisions 61 12 80%

Loop Backs 12 1 92%

Total Handoffs 308 61 80%

Lead Time - Days

526.5 153 71%

60

Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date

1 Place power point on shared drive Cheryl Nov. 9

2 Draft intranet message Erin Nov. 9

3 Elimination of Doc. Review Erin Nov. 16

4 Communication plan – internal and external Bruce Dec. 7

5 Determine what data to collect to measure baseline for goals for team

Erin Dec. 7

6 Clarify Roles and Responsibilities Cheryl Dec. 7

7 Mandate timelines (internal processes) Mark Dec. 7

8 Development of checklist for first meeting Sheri Dec. 7

9 5 copies – needed?? Dawn Dec. 7

Homework John

61

Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date

10 Technology (WIKI, I-3, Share point, Hot Docs. Calendar) Dawn Dec. 7

11 Electronic Signature Dawn Dec. 7

12 Development of Tracking Spreadsheet Sheri Dec. 7

13 Posting of Q&A (process) Stacey Dec. 7

14 Resolution of late applications Tim Dec. 7

15 Lists serve notification Dawn Dec. 7

16 Follow-up survey to contractors (survey monkey) Erin Dec. 7

17 Evaluation Team John Dec. 7

18 Training plan-All Staff; Peer Training; Cross Training Stacey/Mindy Dec. 7

Homework Stacey

62

Item Item Description Person Responsible Due Date

19 Training curriculum Stacey/Mindy Jan. 15

20 Master Calendar (public) Erin Dec. 14

21 Eliminating Duplication of Core Contractor Info. Cheryl Feb. 15

22 Standardization of application forms Diana Feb. 1

23 Development of policies and procedures Cheryl Feb. 1

Homework Stacey