Virginia QC - Best Practices:
The Missing Puzzle Piece
John Carpenter
Quality Assurance Manager
August 20, 2014
Agenda
†
†
†
†
†
†
Virginia QC Trends and Structure
Workload Data
Multi-level Communication
QC Monitoring and Evaluation Unit
Systems and Automation
Ongoing Challenges
Virginia Quality Assurance Unit
†
†
†
†
†
SNAP QC
MEQC, PERM, Eligibility Pilots
Management Evaluations
SNAP Case Readers
Nutrition Education
Error Rate Statistics
Multi-tier Approach
†
†
†
†
†
Goal: avoid fiscal sanctions
Administration
SNAP Policy
QC
Local agency eligibility workers
Virginia’s Structure
†
†
†
†
State supervised; locally administered
120 local agencies; 136 multiple sites where
benefits are issued
Eligibility determined by local agency
employees not state personnel
State agency provides guidance, consultation,
and oversight
Case and Workload Data
†
Active cases statewide: 431,704
„
†
†
Based on FNS248 submitted August 1, 2014
Each local agency worker may average a
caseload of 1000, contingent on location and
programs assigned
QC reviews for FFY2013
„
„
Active: 1099
Negative: 783
Communication
†
†
†
†
Enhance working dialogue between SNAP
and QC
Corrective action process – review error
elements and deploy training accordingly
Policy training – in person and on line,
regional SNAP consultants and training unit
Payment Accuracy Conference and yearly
BPRO (Benefit Programs Organization)
Communication (cont.)
†
†
†
More involvement in the error review process
Consultation on policy interpretation
Different from many other states, VA does
not have an error review committee
„
†
Reviewer – Supervisor – QC Specialist – QC
Manager
Send error to local agencies immediately
Monitoring and Evaluation Unit
†
SNAP Case Readers - #1 Best Practice
„
„
„
„
„
30+ years experience
Review cases from a QC perspective not an
eligibility worker supervisor role
Strategically placed in local agencies across the
Commonwealth
Targeted reviews: intake, prior to authorization,
cases with income, timeliness, denials, etc.
Reporting mechanism
Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (cont)
†
†
Management Evaluations - #2 Best Practice
The 10 agencies with the largest caseloads are
reviewed every year
„
†
12 medium size agencies every other year
„
†
Formerly Big 20; all have >10,000 SNAP HH
Caseloads with >5,000 SNAP HH
98 small agencies once every three years
„
Caseloads with <5,000 SNAP HH
ME Review Components
†
†
†
†
†
†
†
†
†
†
Expedited Services
Non-Expedited Services
Thirty Day Client Delay
Renewal Timeliness
Terminations, Denials, and Withdrawals
Recipient Claims Management and Reporting
Customer Service/Program Access
Civil Rights
National Voter Registration Act (NRVA) of 1993
Recipient Integrity
ME Expectations
†
†
†
Compliance = at least 75% of cases reviewed
per target area are correct
Failure to meet the requirements – Quality
Improvement Plan, a.k.a. Corrective Action
Plan
Agencies found out of compliance are placed
in a “continual re-review” status to ensure
they adequately address deficiencies
System Development
†
†
Virginia is an upload state for SNAP-QCS #3 Best Practice
QA Reviewers requested continued use of Q5i
„
„
†
Edits, custom reports, tools, and strengthens internal
controls
QA Supervisors ensure that all data is comprehensive and
entered correctly – forced review
Performance Indicator Reports published
monthly –assists with corrective action
Custom Automation
†
†
Entire QA workbook is automated in Excel #4 Best Practice
Data is entered into a “Home Page” and
automatically populates all tabs within the
Excel workbook (VA’s version of the 380)
„
HH correspondence (interview, consent), 3rd party
letters (bank, residence), 380 (all elements), comp
sheet, and timeliness evaluation forms
Sub-recipient Monitoring
†
†
†
†
Regional SNAP policy consultants; local
agency case review schedule - #5 Best
Practice
Each consultant is assigned 20-25 local
agencies
Must conduct a yearly comprehensive case
review to evaluate SNAP performance
Data and reports evaluated and shared (APA)
Local Agency Requirements
†
†
†
Local agency eligibility supervisors are
required to review cases completed by all
their assigned workers - #6 Best Practice
Random selection (may be targeted for error
prone elements), results entered into database,
and tracked by SNAP Policy Unit
Follow-up conducted on review results at both
state and local level
Challenges
†
†
Prospective budget vs. actual circumstances
Waiver of the certification face-to-face
interview
„
†
Shelter
„
†
†
Successful for timeliness and customer service
Client statement vs. QC verification
Electronic Application
Affordable Care Act
END OF MY STORY
QUESTIONS?