Integration of Care Committee Meeting December 3, 2021

INTEGRATION OF CARE COMMITTEE

Veronica Fortunato & Donald Powell, IOC Co-Chairs

Friday, December 3rd, 2021, 10a-12p

Zoom Meeting

MINUTES

Attendance: Ronnie Fortunato (acting co-chair), Donald Powell (co-chair), John Schoepp, Janet Goldberg, Guadalupe DominguezPlummer (Recipient), Deborah Greene, Emma Kaywin, Mitchell Caponi, Bill Gross, Billy Fields, Paul Carr, Cassandre Pluviose, Lela Sebashvili, Graham Harriman (Gov’t Co-chair), Rose Chestnut, Joel Zive, Dorothy Farley, Michael Ealy, Brenda Starks-Ross

Staff/PHS: Roland Torres, David Klotz, Bryan Meisel, Aria Shahi (PHS), Kimbirly Mack, Johanna Acosta, Jose Colon-Berdecia

Agenda Item #1: Welcome/Introductions w. Pronouns/Moment of Silence/Review of Minutes

Conducted. Minutes were accepted.

Agenda Item #2: Public Comment

None.

Agenda Item #3: Review of Feedback Process & Correspondence w/ Eunice Casey

Consistent complaint is with length and awkward flow of directive. Kaywin noted that the conversation about purview, while seemingly outside of the issue of care – directly impacts how care is delivered and how people are served – is everyone a cis white male – do the cops get called when a client’s behavior is erratic. Ms. Sabashvili noted that the ask for new members is about edits and not content. The flow of the document did not work for her. The Playsure experience was very different for her than this Framing Directive. More was required of participants who developed the Playsure work. Unclear to her if these strategies will improve care.

Co-Chair Powell noted the many channels of feedback that have been made available to committee members. He staunchly disagreed with the directive being outside of the purview of Ryan White (RW). The Implementation Science (IS) framework has been challenging – but its where HRSA is moving so we need to move too.

Johnell Lawrence discussed concerns about how well we are centering the most vulnerable persons – and considering the harm that is being caused when providers are unable to support themselves and expected to deliver support to these populations. Question should be – how can we – pay folks equitable, mitigate harm, etc.

Ms. Casey asked – how can we do this – completely agree, but these are not the most effective ways to accomplish this. These are sexy ideas that won’t bear out. When I bring up pay equity – its not clear how it will be implemented – let’s discuss best way to do it, instead of talking about if pay equity is important. No one has told her that the pay equity strategy is the best way. 

Mr. Fields noted that change is difficult – why are we arguing about this and that – not hearing any constructive criticism. The directive is being held hostage.

Ms. Dominguez-Plummer closed this part of the discussion by noting that this is a process that we will embark on together. And that we must focus on the care being delivered to Black and brown folks.

Mr. Powell noted that gathering the needed info for pay equity is not a terribly complicated process.

Mr. Harriman reminded the committee that there is a one page logic model that sums of the directive.

Agenda Item #3: Review of One Page Logic Modal for Framing Directive

Ms. Lawrence walked the committee through the one pager and explained the rationale behind each element’s inclusion.

Ms. Fortunato asked to review the Executive Summary to better highlight the work outlined in the directive.

Agenda Item #4: Review of Executive Summary Drafted for the Framing Directive

Mr. Powell read through the Executive Summary drafted by Emma Kaywin and Joel Zive and asked if the summary helped contextualize the document. Members agreed that it helped clarify the goals of the directive.

Summary was edited to read that changes to existing spaces are as allowable by federal guidance.

Ms. Goldberg appreciated the executive summary and its contents – prefers Eunice’s format of the content.

Ms. Casey asked if the committee can just approve the executive summary with the larger framing directive as a guidance document for the recipient, which can then provide the source materials.

Mr. Powell noted that an executive summary, even with a logic model, alone, would leave out a lot of details that are critical to its implementation.

Mr. Bruno noted that the document if very cumbersome – the issue of homophobia seems to get missed – know it’s in the doc, but it should be front and center. The ubiquity of homophobia is not addressed.

Johnell Lawrence responded that when we center racial equity, we address homophobia as well – when we address homophobia alone, we miss those who are most marginalized – must be intersectional.

Homophobia will be included in the executive summary.

Ms. Casey again asked if the executive summary can be renamed and put forward with the logic model since many people don’t agree with the content/details of the framing directive. And if it could be put to a vote in the committee.

Co-Chair Fortunato and Powell vocally disagreed with this option. The grantee disagreed as well.

Ms. Greene asked to review any changes made since the last meeting – the acronym guide was placed at the beginning of the document.

Agenda Item #5: Vote on the Framing Directive and Logic Model

Role Call:

Agenda Item #6: Vote on the Executive Summary for the Framing Directive

All committee members voted yes (18 yays) on the document with accepted edits.