Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

14
Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers Alex O’Shea – Director SRC Policy Section

description

Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers. Alex O’Shea – Director SRC Policy Section. Comcare’s Strategic Framework. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Page 1: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal

outcomes for providers and case managers

Alex O’Shea – Director SRC Policy Section

Page 2: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Comcare’s Strategic Framework

• The framework identifies a range of connected strategies delivered by Comcare to achieve the employer objectives. These strategies include providing advice and education, investigating compliance and supporting rehabilitation.

Page 3: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers
Page 4: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Provider renewal - The SRC Act requires it

• approved rehabilitation providers (ARPs) must apply every 3 years.

• it takes up resources – for Comcare and providers

• allows for review of standards

• Comcare must be satisfied that . . .

Page 5: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

3 stage process of renewal1. Application

– self-audit of closed cases against standards– approach to managing complex cases

2. Assessment of past performance against:- RTW outcome - 90%, median cost - $1,590 (now $1,890), median duration - 19 weeks, service standards (timeframes etc) future performance assessment 3. Written decision

Page 6: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

The outcome…• There were 180 ARPs in the system at December

2006. Comcare received 130 renewal applications and most were renewed

• a small number of applicants were not renewed • about 20%, including large and multi-state ARPs,

were granted ‘conditional’ re-approval.

Page 7: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Other outcomes

• Comcare strengthened its communications with ARPs

Page 8: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Other outcomes (continued)

• Comcare observed successful and unsuccessful ARP – employer service delivery models

Page 9: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Other outcomes (continued)

• Comcare observed strengths and weaknesses in its RTW model

Page 10: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Messages for case managers

• know the ARP outcome and service delivery standards

• engage ARPs who deliver

• develop Service Level Agreements with ARPs

Page 11: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Messages for case managers

• build robust RTW management systems which:– Build strong employer commitment– Have clear policies and procedures– Plan and implement actions and get resources– Are regularly reviewed– Allow for continuous improvement

Page 12: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Messages for ARPs• Understand role of ARP in this jurisdiction• Develop service level agreements (SLAs)• Use audit checklists and report on

performance• Seek feedback from case managers• Have management systems• Undertake Comcare training

Page 13: Approved Rehabilitation Provider Renewal outcomes for providers and case managers

Messages for Comcare• Comcare will work with conditionally

approved providers to ensure their performance meets standards

• Monitoring performance is important for everyone – Comcare, employers and ARPs

• Work is being conducted through HWCA on a model of national provider approval