CONSUMERS COMMITTEE
Tuesday, August 17, 2021, 10:00AM – 11:15AM
By Zoom Video Conference
M I N U T E S
Committee Members Present: Lisa Best (Co-chair), Billy Fields, Lawrence Francis, Yves Gephardt, Charmaine Graham, David Martin (Consumer-at-Large), Michael Rifkin, Leo Ruiz, John Schoepp, Asia Betancourt
DOHMH: Cristina Rodriguez-Hart,David Klotz,Melanie Lawrence,Scott Spiegler
Agenda Item #1: Welcome/Introductions
David M. chaired the meeting as Lisa B. and Randall B. were not in attendance at the start of the meeting. The draft minutes of the July 20th and August 2nd meetings were approved with no changes.
Agenda Item #2: Public Comment
David M. thanked everyone who contributed to the member tribute at Riverside Park. It helped them get over some of the anxiety they’ve been experiencing during the pandemic.
Agenda Item #3: Final Edits and Vote on Aging & HIV Service Directive
Cristina R.H. gave everyone an orientation to the changes that were made to the directive since the 8/2/21 meeting, which were mostly small clarifications and formatting changes.
A summary of the discussion follows:
- David M. explained that his new changes were to make it more concise.
- We discussed using the language of “clients” instead of “patients” as it’s more empowering and appropriate for clinical and non-clinical settings. PWH is used when we’re not referring to clients specifically but PWH in general. We corrected for an instance where patients still existed.
- The snapshot view of the directive has different colors and now has numbers so it’s easier to see that each component is different and to see the flow.
- Cristina explained that DOHMH’s COTA staff gave the correct terminology and information for the Be InTo Health program.
- We discussed adding “other qualified provider” to the fourth bullet of the implementation strategy “Planning and Quality Management Strategies for Clinical Services, Outpatient Medical Care.”
- Under the “Prevention and Wellness” implementation strategy, the first bullet was modified to align with the RFP language for Be InTo Health.
- Under implementation strategy “Training,” we had a lengthy discussion about requiring trainings. It was expressed that all RW providers should be trained on aging PWH but this is in tension with the fact that providers already participate in many trainings.
- Cristina clarified that a learning collaborative shouldn’t still be in the document because it was decided at the last meeting to remove it.
- Scott said that last year an aging with HIV training was developed and it will soon be required and reimbursed for RW providers, so first bullet point is not needed. Providers have 6 months to complete trainings. He said bullets 1-3 are things the recipient already does. The recipient has spent a lot of time in the past couple years developing the aging training.
- John S. asked if DOHMH would accept non-DOHMH trainings to fulfill the requirements and Scott said yes after they review the trainings.
- Charmaine G. asked how we would know if the trainings are utilized by the providers. Scott said that after contract execution they monitor this and can report it to the Planning Council.
- The CC agreed to delete the first bullet and keep the remaining ones.
- Under “Implementation Outcomes,” Cristina R.H. explained her modification to the second outcome to utilize the existing system of pre-posttest surveys to assess provider knowledge, as this would not increase the burden on the recipient to administer a completely separate provider survey to assess knowledge on comorbidities.
- John S. felt we don’t need it because providers are getting trained, but David M. felt that it would be good to have this provider knowledge reported to the Planning Council rather than having to ask for it. It was suggested to add having the proportion trained reported as an outcome, but the group decided against adding this outcome.
- David K. brought up a previous comment from Guadalupe about surveying providers every 2 years instead of annually. Cristina explained that the comment no longer applies because it was about the old outcome that was removed.
- We agreed on the outcome as revised by Cristina R.H.
- We removed an “r” from Peter Messeri’s name in the endnotes. “Memorandum” was changed to “Memoranda” on page 7.
John S. made a motion to accept the directive as revised, seconded by Charmaine G. A vote was taken and the motion adopted 10Y-0N.
- The approved directive will next go to the Executive Committee during their first meeting in the fall.
There being no further business, the CC meeting was adjourned.
