INTEGRATION OF CARE COMMITTEE
Danielle Beiling & Donald Powell, IOC Co-Chairs
Wednesday, July 21st, 2021, 10a-12p
Zoom Meeting
MINUTES
Attendance: Ronnie Fortunato (acting co-chair), Donald Powell (co-chair), Leo Ruiz, John Schoepp, Dorothy Farley, Randall Bruce, Joel Zive, Brenda Starks-Ross, Graham Harriman (Director), Janet Goldberg, Annette Roque, Claire Simon, Guadalupe Dominguez-Plummer, Gregg Bruckno, Deborah Greene
Staff/PHS: Ashley Azor, , Andrea Feduzi, David Klotz, Cristina Rodriguez-Hart, Jose Colon-Berdecia, Johnell Lawrence, Anisha Gandhi
Agenda Item #1: Welcome/Introductions w. Pronouns/Moment of Silence/Review of Minutes
Conducted. Icebreaker: What takes you to a good place. Moment of silence led by Randall Bruce. Minutes were accepted with one correction – Randall Bruce was included in the attendance.
Agenda Item #2: Public Comment
None.
Agenda Item #3: Line-by-line Editing of the Framing Directive
Ms. Lawrence reminded the committee of where we left off last meeting – the language around training was changed because Ryan White (RW) can only pay for training for funded RW staff.
Continued reading through the document line-by-line edits in the strategy section.
Ms. Greene asked if OASAS should be included. Mr. Harriman noted that we want to name other resources for training – but must consider the burden on the recipient to culminate these resources. Strategy asks that the recipient work with other entities, like AETC etc., to coordinate trainings. Ideally there is a point person who knows what trainings are available to meet training requirements (outside of DOHMH).
Extended conversation about training, coordination and availability followed – resulting in the refining of coordination to focus on HRSA funded entities in real time.
Ensured that it is acceptable to incentive inclusion and diversity in staffing.
Included anonymous suggestion box for staff
Inclusion of accessible hours of operation
Changed eligibility to reflect possible changes on the state level.
Outcomes require the recipient to report back to the Council – to better help the Council understand how effective the portfolio is.
Important to think about potential data burden of outcomes. May take a number of years for some of the measures to come online. Ms. Gandhi suggested a table of data measures be created to understand what is available. What penalties exist if the recipient doesn’t measure these outcomes.
Ms. Feduzi asked how we will operationalize some of these measures. Consumer engagement activities are outlined in the strategies.
Ms. Gandhi noted that these measures tie back to the mandates of the End the HIV Epidemic (EHE) document, but more specifically.
Recipent has flexibility in defining how they measure these – so measuring awareness of gender affirmation – could look like how many providers complete a training.
Many edits were made to consumer engagement measures.
Local ETE plan only goes until 2020 – but new metrics have not been developed – difficult to align this document considering that.
When those metrics are developed, will revisit outcome measures.
What is quality of life for PWH – there is literature on standardized quality of life indices.
Ms. Goldberg noted that quality of life assessment tools are prevalent, but adding another assessment may be burdensome.
Don’t want to focus solely on medical outcomes.
Mr. Lawrence noted that these outcomes feel limiting – doesn’t consider whole person. God’s Love We Deliver does ask clients to assess quality of entire life.
Stigma and bias are not the same thing – stigma is more relevant.
Document would benefit from a measure regarding affirming/safety
Committee reviewed and accepted changes to the document.
People will get burned out – trauma informed care is to help staff manage and navigate through that burn out.
Framing Directive approved by IOC Committee 14Y-0N.
