Next meeting: March 4, 2004
1:00 – 3:00 p.m.
at Minnesota AIDS Project
(1400 Park Avenue, Minneapolis)
Minnesota Department of Health
STD and HIV Section
HIV/STD Community Prevention Planning
COMMISSIONER'S TASK FORCE ON HIV/STD PREVENTION PLANNING
Executive Committee Minutes
February 5, 2004
Present
Task Force Members
Community Members
Rosemary Thomas via phone
Kathy Brothen
Kip Beardsley
Doris Johnson
Gerry Anderson
Kirk Fiereck
Nick Metcalf
Rhys Fulenwider
Jerry Moss
Absent
Task Force Members
Donna Clark - notified
Kelly Hansen - notified
MDH Staff
Julie Hanson Pérez
Janell Brown
Community Members
Don Anderson
MDH Staff
MINUTES AND AGENDA APPROVAL
Nick Metcalf opened the meeting. The minutes from the January meeting were reviewed and
approved. The conflict of agenda item was moved further down on the agenda.
SPENDING PLAN TARGETING AFRICAN AND LATINO COMMUNITIES
Kip Beardsley presented the spending plan for the $150,247 targeting African and Latino
communities. The plan had been revised following discussion at the January Task Force
meeting. The Executive Committee was being asked to provide final approval as to whether the
activities proposed in the plan address the findings from the needs assessments conducted in
the African and Latino communities.
Epi data for both populations were added to the plan in order to provide context. There was only
one change to the proposal for the African communities. In the original version of the plan, staff
of Minnesota Department of Health funded agencies were required to complete a culturally
competent AIDS 101 curriculum training being developed by the American Red Cross. Based
on concerns raised at the Task Force meeting, a change was made to clarify that staff would
still be required to complete such a curriculum, but it would not necessarily need to be the one
being developed by the American Red Cross.
Executive Committee Minutes, 9/18/03, page 1
At the Task Force meeting, concern was raised that the Latino population was only receiving the
funding that was left over after activities targeting African communities were funded. Kirk
Fiereck asked if the distribution of funding had been adjusted at all. Kip replied that it had not.
This decision was made based on two factors: 1) the rate of new infections in 2002 was much
higher among Africans [130 – 185] compared to Latinos [21.6]; and 2) MDH is already directing
$110,000 in funding to two agencies to provide prevention interventions in the Latino
community, but is not currently funding any agencies in African communities.
The proposed activities targeting the Latino community were revised somewhat so that they are
more focused. Priority will be placed on promoting testing in the immigrant, MSM and migrant
worker communities. Kip noted that the community outreach coordinator will identify agencies
that have resources and are willing to have capacity built within them to provide or promote HIV
testing to those communities.
Julie voiced her concern that the activities may not be very effective in promoting testing in the
Latino community. She was concerned that organizations may not be able take on extra
activities without funding. She asked whether it would be more effective to hire someone to
actually do outreach and testing. When she had previously shared her concerns with Kip and
Lucy Slater, they had pointed out that the focus of this proposal is to build capacity within the
community to continue the work once the funding ends. If a person was hired to do outreach
and testing, the activity would end when the funding ended. Julie noted that this also occurs
with activities funded through the regular RFP process.
Kip acknowledged that the proposal clearly entails a lot of work for one person. The priority is
for the activities to target populations within the Latino community that have the highest risk. He
also noted that the coordinator will not spend another year on needs assessment; s/he will start
work to address the needs that have already been identified.
Kip announced that the STD and HIV Section has hired Chrissy Jones to fill the counseling and
testing coordinator position. Her previous grant manager position will need to be filled. In her
new position, Chrissy will conduct an assessment of the counseling, testing and referral (CTR)
resources in the state, identify how MDH should direct its funding in this area, and develop a
plan for implementing CTR training. Nick proposed making tapes of the trainings to help reduce
the cost of having people travel to different areas in the state. Kirk noted that this works well for
people from Greater Minnesota. There was discussion about the possibility and value of making
the educational tapes. Kip said MDH would have think about it. Although there are pluses to
using tapes for training, there are also minuses, such as not having the opportunity for
interaction and not being able to do role plays.
Doris Johnson asked if it the Community Outreach Coordinator position will continue for another
year and Kip replied that it could be a possibility, depending on the amount of funding available
in 2005. Nick felt it was important to make it clear to the community that the outreach
coordinator position would not be in place after the funding ends. Kip noted that the purpose of
this funding is to build capacity within organizations so that they will be able to continue the work
even after the outreach coordinator position has ended. Gerry said that it is important to finish
what we’ve started. It doesn’t look good if we start something and realize that there is more to
do, but no resources to support it. Kip replied that as we move forward and find out what the
needs and capacity are, this is something that the Task Force is going to have to consider.
Consensus: The Executive Committee agreed that the activities proposed in the spending plan
address the needs and recommendations identified by the African and Latino communities.
Executive Committee Minutes, 9/18/03, page 2
COMMUNITY ACCESS
Celebration of Change
The Celebration of Change will be held on February 17th at Wake Up Were Affected (WUWA)
from 5:00 – 7:00 p.m. The Celebration of Change will be an event to recognize and celebrate
the work of the Task Force. There will be contest to choose a new name for the Task Force.
There will be music and a prize given to the person who suggests the winning name for the
Task Force.
Doris asked why the name is changing and whose idea it was. Julie said the Task Force has
talked about changing the name for years, and this seems like a good time to do it since we’ve
just gone through a major restructuring process. Kathy said the term “task force” usually refers
to a group that has a beginning and an end with a short term task. Jerry suggested that during
the contest, people should explain how the name they are proposing reflects the work of the
Task Force.
Meeting Date in March
Julie asked whether it would be possible to make another change to the date of the Community
Access meeting in March. It had been previously changed from March 16th to March 9th in order
allow sufficient time to plan for the orientation. However, it turns out that Becky Kroll will not be
able to attend on March 9th. Kathy Brothen agreed to send out an e-mail to the committee to
propose changing the meeting to March 2nd from 4:00 – 6:00 p.m. at WUWA. It will be assumed
that March 2nd will be the new meeting date unless staff are otherwise notified.
Orientation for all Task Force members will be held on March 18th from 12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
at the Roseville Library.
Recruitment
The Task Force needs to recruit and interview possible new members prior to the March 4th
Executive Committee meeting. In order to do that, a due date for receiving new applications
has been set for February 20th. After that time, we will not be recruiting or bringing anyone on
again until November. The applications have been updated to reflect the expected time
commitment under the restructured planning process. Julie presented a draft of a recruitment
letter to be e-mailed to prevention providers and other interested individuals. She asked
whether the letter should come from MDH, Community Access, or the Task Force? Kathy
thought the letter should come from the Task Force. The committee agreed.
Julie asked for feedback on the letter. It was suggested that information regarding time
commitment be added, as well as expressing that membership on the Task Force provides an
opportunity to have a voice in how prevention is provided in the State of Minnesota.
TIMELINE FOR NEW COMMITTEES
At the April Task Force meeting, the Task Force will be approving the bylaws. Once they are
approved, members who decide to serve on a committee this year should then go ahead and
pick their committee. The first Community Access Committee meeting after the bylaws are
approved will be on May 18th Julie asked if the committee could have a discussion at that
meeting about setting future meeting days and times so that new committee members could
participate in the conversation. Committee members agreed.
Executive Committee Minutes, 9/18/03, page 3
The next Executive Committee is scheduled for July 1st. The committee decided to reschedule
the meeting due to the proximity of the 4th of July holiday. The meeting was rescheduled for the
following Thursday, July 8th. At that meeting, the committee will also discuss future meeting
days and times.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Julie stated that a Task Force member, who was not able to be present today, was concerned
by a comment made by Rhys Fulenwider at the last Task Force meeting. At that meeting, he
stated that he had been directed by his agency to concur at the concurrence meeting in
September. Julie noted that the purpose of having this discussion is not to focus on Rhys or his
agency; it is a broader discussion about whether MDH and the Task Force can or should do
anything to prevent members’ decisions being influenced by the agencies they work for. Rhys
believed that it would be difficult since, for example, he is paid by his agency to attend. Rhys
said he doesn’t believe this is a conflict of interest. He added that he would not have concurred
if he hadn’t been in agreement. He felt that it was best for the process at that point to concur.
Nick felt that Julie was being put in an awkward situation since she is trying to present an issue
that someone else raised. He suggested that the discussion be postponed until the individual
who has the concern is able to be present to discuss it. Kathy said that she had also spoken
with the person and believed the concern was about Task Force members not having free will.
She thought Rhys made it clear that he felt he did have free will.
Rhys stated that one alternative would be for employees to attend Task Force meetings on nonpaid time. That would have to include individuals from MDH. Rhys also suggested that it would
be helpful to ask questions during interviews with new members such as, “Will you attend
meetings on paid time? Is your agency supporting you on this?”
Kip suggested developing a letter from the co-chairs that could be given to new members’
supervisors. The letter would explain what the Task Force is, and what we are looking for from
members. The letter would acknowledge that identifying roles and boundaries is going to be
challenging for an agency and would encourage supervisors to have open conversation with
their staff person about what goes on at the Task Force. The committee agreed this was a
good idea.
Julie will talk to the person who raised the issue to see if they are comfortable with the outcome
of today’s discussion. If not, it will be put on the agenda for further discussion at the March
meeting. Kip will work on a draft letter and will bring it to the next Community Access meeting.
OVERVIEW OF APRIL AND MAY TASK FORCE MEETINGS
At the April and May meetings, the Task Force will work on developing processes that will be
used over the next few years. There are five areas that we will focus on: prioritization, gap
analysis/resource inventory, needs assessment, orientation and training, and the plan and
concurrence process. The CDC guidance has changed in relation to what is required in a plan,
so the Task Force needs to discuss what value it places on areas that are currently included but
no longer required.
The two processes that will be the most difficult to discuss are prioritization and gap analysis.
There is a lot to consider in terms of what kind of data need to be considered for prioritization
Executive Committee Minutes, 9/18/03, page 4
and how to weigh different pieces of information. For gap analysis, the Task Force needs to
spend time figuring out how to define what a met need is in order to help determine what an
unmet need is. We will start with those two areas in April and continue into May, if needed.
Julie asked the committee for feedback on whether it would be would be best to work on the
various topics as the full Task Force or by breaking into smaller groups. The committee agreed
that it would be best to have smaller groups discuss various topic areas on the first day of the
meeting, and then come back for discussion and approval on each of the areas by the full Task
Force on the second day. She also asked for suggestions of individuals to invite to participate
in discussion of any of the specific topics. The following names were suggested for both
prioritization and gap analysis: Gary Remafedi, Sharon Day, Weston Edwards, Kevin Sitter,
Charlie Tamble, Fred and Eileen McCormick, Peggy O’Halloran, Lorraine Teel, Sue Purchase,
and Luisa Pessoa Brandão or Tracy Sides.
Executive Committee Minutes, 9/18/03, page 5