CESSA Technology, Systems Integration & Data Management Subcommittee Meeting - Approved Minutes 5/15/2023

CESSA Subcommittee for Technology, Systems Integration & Data Management (TSIDM)

May 15, 2023, 2:30 - 4:00 pm

Meeting Minutes - Approved by Members 06/05/2023

https://uic.zoom.us/j/8275005090

Subcommittee members: Brent Reynolds, Cindy Barbera-Brelle, David Albert (Designee-Lee Ann Reinert), Richard Manthy, Alice Cary, Jim Kaitschuk, Ashley Thoele (Designee - Patrick Sennett)

Expert Consultant Group (ECG) members: Peter Eckart, Chris Baldwin

  1. Welcome and Call to Order
  2. Meeting Logistics/OMA
  3. Roll Call and Approval of Minutes from previous TSIDM meeting
  4. Discussion regarding data needs and collection
  5. State Updates
  6. Wrap Up
  7. Public Comment
  8. Adjournment

The meeting was opened by Brent Reynolds at 2:32.

Roll call:

Present: Reynolds, Barbera-Brelle, Kaitschuk, Reinert, Manthy

Approval of previous meeting minutes: Motion to approve by Barbera-Brelle, Second by Manthy. Approved by Reynolds, Barbera-Brelle, Kaitschuk, and Manthy. Abstain by Reinert.

State Updates:

  • Lee Ann:
    • Deadline is likely going to be extended by the end of the legislative session ending this week. We will look for the official notice. Late last Friday, the State received our broad state metrics report (call center answer rate report) and I'm very happy to report we had the highest answer rate we have ever had in our state up to 87%. It's been moving up 3-4 % points a month for the last few months. SAMSHA released a NOFO for the state to continue capacity funding for the State. We are preparing ourselves to apply for more money.
    •  Jim: The bill on the extension has more than just the extension. It's already passed the House and is in the Senate. It's Bill 1364, Senate amendment #2.
    •  Brett: The changes I would say are minimal, but there are additional changes.

Recommendations necessary to implement CESSA Standards and Protocols statewide and regionally:

  • Peter:
  • This is work Mary and I have been doing on behalf of the group. We are doing our first set of deliverables and got them to the SAC. We do not have a second set for today. I have set up a couple of conversations for us to have right now. Then Mary and I will use the results of this conversation to continue to build out the elements we are trying to get to.
  • Data collection plan for aggregate statewide data and regional data
    • Mary: The Crisis Hub has been working to identify the indicators and data we need to meet the CESSA initiative. There are also evaluators that are collecting elements, and DMH, and 988. It seems to make sense to work with a vendor to create a data system to pull all needed data elements into one system and make it available to all who need access to this data. Monitoring and evaluative the CESSA implementation through this system developed in concert with UIC Center for Clinical and Translational Science.
    • Peter: we are trying to leverage both money and relationships to create a new system to gather data together in a way that responds to the metrics that we have been talking about here for months. We are very early in that process. We had the first getting to know you meeting today. We will want to bring in Cindy as soon as possible and consult with this committee. This is not going to be a giant data system that connects all of the partners, but what this is is an early attempt to try and gather the most important information from the parts of the system so we can understand how the changes we are making to the system will be measured.
  • Call transfer technology recommendations
    • 911 to 988
    • 988 to 590
    • 590 to MCRT (not call transfers necessarily)
      • Chris Baldwin: How are you distinguishing between 590 and MCRT?
        • Peter: I'm following current guidance stating that when 988 contacts 590, they are not dispatching, but the decision is made at the 590 center.
        • Chris Baldwin: My understanding is that they are talking to the team directly and deciding whether or not they are going out. I'd be interested in hearing more about what different centers do.
      • Jim: Part of the matrix was the timeline trying to get to point A to point B, so when a different first responder is going to be dispatched from 911 in the MCRT is not able to make it within said timeline, how will that work?
        • Peter: Part of their decision making about the matrix is that a particular type of crisis might suggest that a MCRT is the right response, but if they can't get someone there because there's too much distance, then an MCRT might not be who is sent because a quicker response is needed. I think our opportunity here is to make recommendations that a particular approach or technology might aid in executing those decisions faster or more efficiently.
      • Rick Manthy: How many times do we send out a 590 team to an incident and 911 needed to be contacted again by the 590 providers? Having first responders on the street connecting 988 directly instead of 911 to 988 is going to be very difficult for us to track. I don't know how that information would be obtained.
      • Peter: Cindy, do we have any options for call transfer technology other than making telephone calls from 911 telecommunicators to 988 operators?
        • Cindy: I have had some exchange with AT&T, I would like to defer my response to look at some of the exchanges and send my response to you and Mary.
        • Chris Baldwin: One of the big technical considerations to keep in mind is ensuring our data aligns with Vibrant's data. Vibrant is only tracking calls that are dialed through 988 specifically. Here at PATH we created a separate phone line for callbacks from places like 590 and 911 that we call them and they have to call us back and give us an update. So, we have a separate line, so that those calls are not cluttering our 988 data. If they use our 10-digit number it will show more calls than what Vibrant is showing. I do not know what is the best way to ensure that that system gets reflected correctly by Vibrant to minimize discrepancies.
        • Cindy: Would we entertain, or would Vibrant consider that just an other call type and track that in addition to the calls to 988? We have wired lines to 911, wireless calls to 911, texts to 911. We track them all separately then aggregate the data. I wonder if we can get the location data as part of the transfer, and track as a different type of data based on this.
        • Chris: One of the benefits to calling 988 it will route to the appropriate call center based on area code, which if from 911 should be accurate, if they are unable to answer it will roll over to the next call center. One of the risks of 911 using a direct line to a specific call center is that if that call center is busy, the call will just wait on the line.
        • Brent: I would like to make sure we get different representatives from 988, 911 to weigh in on this conversation.
      • Rick: The more we can work with 988 and 911 Centers the more it will help us out. I have more confusion with the time frames. I think I need more clarification on this. I was talking with a 911 provider, and they don't really use time frames.
        • Mary: I don't think that we have talked about response times outside of the behaviors described in the IRLM. It depends on the level of severity the 911 telecommunicators make. One of the things we want to do is look at the 66 agencies that are providing crisis response and look at the time it's taking them in fiscal 23 from the time they were dispatched to the time they actually arrived on site. If it turns out the average response time for a center is 60 minutes, but the recommended response time is 30, there would be an alternative response time suggested for that center. I think the idea is to have the discussion in each Region level and then each PSAP
    • Recommendations regarding phased implementation of new processes and systems
      • Phase 1 - FY24 (July 23 to June 24
      • Phase 2 - FY25 (July 24 to June 25
      • Phase 3 - FY26 (July 25 to June 26)
        • Brent: I think this was based on the original timeline of July 1 2023, but if we get the extension I would be interested in extending this timeline.
          • Peter: We can do a Phase 0 which could be a planning phase in this current extended time.
          • Rick: The bulk of the work is going to be in the initial setup and I think laying the foundation if very important and that where a big part of our emphasis should be on.
          • Cindy: I agree the foundational piece is most critical. We should plan that out and allow ourselves enough time to do that right.
            • Peter: I think one of the things we want to build into this phase implementation piece is Aligning ourselves with other system implementations we know about (NextGen system for 911), new SAMHSA grant, new lifeline Center. Maybe make part of our next agenda item. What else are people working on that we can build into our planning so that we are taking advantage of things that are coming up and not working at cross purposes?

Next Meeting Monday June 5th at 2:30 pm. Our Monday June 19th meeting moved from the 19th to the 20th at 9 am.

Public Comment: No hands raised.

Adjournment: Meeting adjourned by Brent Reynolds at 3:43 with no contest.