File Name of Parent Documents
Assess_BND_QOL_18080701_Results
Title Image – Keith AKA
Buster AKA DAG
Title – Social Health - Appropriate Dress
Sample
-
-
Keith Torkelson AKA Buster AKA DAG
Attending a 2018 Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)
Steering Committee Meeting (SCM)
-
Blogger Title
Brand New Day - Quality Of
Life Study I (2012-2018) – For and By Keith E Torkelson, MS
-
Google Plus Information
Keywords: Jeff Gibbs -
External Quality Review – KE Torkelson (2018)
Blog(s)
Brand New Day
Study Group - Partners
-
Dedicated To
This report about Quality Of Life
is dedicated to: Mary Hale (Direction), Kathleen Murray (Health Technology),
Gloria Shanks (Master Mom), Lanaii Kline (Family), Rimal B Bera (Behavioral
Health), Jeff Gibbs (Helper), Oswaldo Escalante (Model Helper), and Jeffery
Nagel (Public Health Operations Management).
In Memory
This paper is in memory of Brand
New Day member Doug Keith. We shared a
room with Doug for over one year. Doug
suffered as a minimum anxiety disorder.
Doug died too young and nobody has stepped up to take account of his
passing.
-
[INSERT DUG]
-
-
Doug "DUG" Keith as we knew him living :o)
-
Abstract – Executive Summary
This report began as an
evaluation of us using the Brand New Day (Prescribed) Quality Of Life (QOL)
assessment. We also used the (BND-QOL)
as an opportunity to update our evaluation of our prescribed Brand New Day
(BND) helper. For this part this paper
addresses Keith E Torkelson, MS (Consumer) and Jeff Gibbs, MA our most current
BND Helper. For the first three years
we applied this BND-QOL instrument and observed a peak and trough pattern. The range for our BND-QOL scores during this
period is 13%-64%. 100% indicates
stellar quality of life. Initially the
BND-QOL was assigned by BND. After time
and three changes about Helpers BND stopped soliciting score revisions. From 2015-2016 the period we were trying to
break in Jeff Gibbs we self-scored from 62%-71%. Our current scoring period is 2017-2018. The range for this period of our BND-QOL
scores is from 52%-92%. The 52% is
related to the impact that our Detached Retina (Blindness) had on us. We also assess the value and impact, past
and present, that eight (8) of our BND Helpers had on us. The scores range form A to F. One of our helpers (Ali) only stayed around
long enough so he could complete the work assigned him by BND corporate. Within six (6) months he met the corporate
demands on him and he was promoted to corporate.
-
Helper Stability & Unmet
Housing Needs
As far as BND worker (helper)
stability is concerned: From 2012-2016 we worked with four different
Helpers. We consider this unstable on
their part. Our first helper Oswaldo
set the bar high back in 2012. About
Oswaldo Escalante (RAS) our worker (helper) 2012-2013 we scored him for helpfulness
(usefulness) a 77.1%. Jeff Gibbs still
believes he is our current helper. In a
manner of speaking we fired him in 2016.
Yet since he thinks we have a viable partnership we updated his score
for helpfulness and usefulness. For
2017/18 he earns a 41.7%. On one
occasion while addressing our Unmet Housing Needs Jeff Gibbs indicated the
reason he could not help us is my “caseload is overwhelming”. Over time we realized he doesn’t really have
any tangible housing resources such as lists of name, addresses, and phone
numbers. Overall we plan to address
seven (7) approaches to Quality Of Life (QOL).
You will see our assessment classifications in a table later on. One final note: Earlier this morning (August
10, 2018) we were on our routine weekly call to one of our principle
supporters. We were talking about
mutual personal improvement. We told
her that we stand to make gains in our Quality Of Life (QOL) by the years end.
-
Impact On Quality Of Life
Will publishing this report
impact our QOL As Measured By (AMB) the BND-QOL assessment? Not really.
For a couple of our prior reports for BND we invoiced them. BND has yet to make good on our
billings. We have a going rate of
$20/Page. If they paid up then we would
have more money to spend. In general
having more money to spend not only empowers us it favors an improvement in our
quality of life.
-
List – Tables, Matrices, Figures
-
Figure - Sample of Caseload – Student Teacher
Table - Quality Of Life Related Assessments (BND QOL Report
I)
Table - Results Tables - Acronyms
(AcroCodes)
Table - Case Management Checklist
(Brief) – Comparative Evaluation
Matrix - QOL Assessment Results – Longitudinal (2011-2014)
Matrix - QOL Assessment Results – Longitudinal (2015-2016)
Matrix - QOL Assessment Results – Longitudinal (2017-2018)
Matrix - Rubric for MSG Binary
Scoring
Table - Links To Priors Publications in Scope - Graduate By
DEATH Program
Figure - Scan of Brand New Day (BND) – Quality Of Life (QOL)
Assessment
Table - Results – Eight (8)
Community Helpers Participation About Our QOL
Matrix - Helper Quality –
Relative to Us – Comparing Two (2)
-
Appendix - Table – BND-QOL -
Assessment Header Information
Appendix - Table – Quality of
Life Self-Assessment (20180729-SUN)
Appendix – FYI Table – Non-professional Helpers - One And
The Same – Roles
Appendix – Figure Readability Stats
-
Introduction
We were new to Quality Of Life
(QOL) paper assessments when we signed on with Brand New Day (BND) in
2012. Our Personal Care Coordinator
(Case Manager) Oswaldo Escalante (RAS) blasted through the intake package (Some
of 10 pages) in less than an hour.
Fortunately he provided us with copies of most if not all
documents. We found three (3) of the
forms of long-term interest: Collaborative Personal Recovery Plan (CPRP), CPRP
Terms of Participation (TOP), and BND’s Quality of Life Self-Assessment (BND-QOL). They implied that our Coordination
partnership with BND would make clear, address, and tackle any problems as
needed (PRN). Every time we solved a
significant issue or problem we would update the Trio of Documents to keep
moving forward. Oswaldo did everything
he could to help us out with housing.
We address housing issues yearly during the summer. Eventually Oswaldo moved on such is the case
with case managers. Our BND
relationship with case managers has been unstable since Oswaldo. In other words we are more stable than the
help. When we asked Jeff Gibbs to help
us out he said he could not help. He
implied that his caseload was too big to help us. Normally, we would submit our BND-QOL findings to Jeff
Gibbs. But since he doesn’t have the
time to help us out why bother him.
Some of the information that would be privileged for him we are
publishing in this report.
-
Solicitation Dilemma
Metadata:
08_MSG_PNP_15071203_Solicitation Dilemma V2018
We here at MSG have been writing
reports about the psychosocial aspect in Health & Human Services since
2009. We find that if an Agency or
individual does not solicit our findings they lack the resources to consider
them in depth. One of our last
unsolicited reports addressed our lived experience with our referral and
linkage to our new (and improved) Behavioral Health Doctor. His name is Rimal B Bera MD. One of the reasons we here at MSG continue
to publish unsolicited reports is that they help us appreciate where we are and
how far we have come for setting things RIGHT.
For us Blogging has proven a better route than direct submissions. This report about BND-QOL interests is an
unsolicited report.
-
Documentation
Review
Collaborative Personal Recovery
Plan (CPRP-TOP)
In the CPRP Terms Of Participation
(TOP) we consumers are asked to make some contributions to Brand New Day
(BND). Yet BND does not promise us much
in return. “Mutual collaboration of the
member and the care coordinator” implies a productive partnership. The CPRP itself indicates three (3) Recovery
Phases: (I) Wellness, (II) Integration and (III) Successful Living. Guess where we are?
-
Database Management
Next we queried our databases:
Tork Reconstruction Company (TorkBase), Mentalation Solutions Group (MSGBase),
and AVEYBase. We primarily retrieved,
reviewed, touched up, and extracted as necessary about the theme Quality Of
Life (QOL). As of today, August 9,
2018, our “qol” query pings 41 Items.
-
Innovation – Assessment Flow
[PENDING CONSTRUCTION – FULLY
EXECUTED – BETA Version]
-
-
Assessment Cycle a Product of TorkMark (2018)
-
Assessment Cycles
In an educational setting the
assessment cycle is a no brain. The two
key elements are: Teaching to the test and returning the assessment marked up
and interpreted to the test taker. The
magnitude of faulting about these two steps in Health & Human Services is
huge. Assessments prescribed at the
Federal, Regional, State, County, and City levels rarely get marked up and
returned to the test takers. What would
happen if you repeatedly told your students: Here is the exam! I, the teacher, am not going to return or
consider your scores. Perform an image
search for “measurement cycle” or “assessment cycle”. Most hits we found failed to clearly say: Return the results back
to the consumer, test taker, or student.
-
Reasons We Life Long Learners
Want Results
When we were engaged in the
Secondary Teacher Education (STE) program administered by the California State
University @ Fullerton we committed to maintaining a status of Life Long
Learner. Some of the agencies for which
we have been asked to take their solicited assessments during 2017 and 2018
are: CMS, Brand New Day, and Central City Community Health Center. None of these agencies score our assessments
and returned our results. Simply having
assessment and test results help us to better navigate our Recovery and Setting
Right Things (SRT). There is a plethora
of reasons to return tests to the test taker.
These are out of scope for this study.
-
The Brand New Day – Dream
Operation
We have mentioned before that one
of our personal missions is to help Brand New Day become a “Dream
Operation”. Vis-à-vis External Quality
Review (EQR) we hope to help them improve their mediocre CMS Stars Score (C*S). We have been at it for four or so years yet
we have had little impact with BND.
-
Figure – Sample of Caseload – Student Teacher
Database Find – Caseload (Class Size)
-
Figure – Sample of Caseload –
Student Teacher – Grade Book Created and Maintained by Keith E Torkelson, MS
(Class size = 34/1 Period)
-
Helper Will Not Help
We will discuss our current BND
Helper, Jeff Gibbs, more later on in this report. Jeff Gibbs implied he could not help us in part because the
demands of his caseload were too high.
Basically, even though he was assigned to us as a helper he refused to
help us. As you can see in the Table
and Metadata above we did a “Gig” as a student teacher. For Fall Quarter 2001 we had three classes
to teach: Two Biology and One Physical Science. With an average class size of 34 our total class load was
approximately 100/Day. At the same time
we were on call to help our Most Significant Other Ever (MSOE) Joan as needed
(PRN). When she needed help moving, we
found time and leveraged our resources to help her move. Because Jeff Gibbs lacks transparency we
really don’t know how big his overwhelming caseload really is. The data above is from Valley High School in
Santa Ana California. At the time VHS
was considered a low performing school.
Jeff Gibbs manages low performing clients. The demands of our VHS assignment were intensive with sub-par
returns. See the FYI below. We find that there is too little Behavioral
Health in K-12 school and to little school in Behavioral Health.
-
Figures – High School Performance
[INSERT FIGURES COMPARING TWO HS PERFORMANCES]
-
FYI - Valley High in Santa Ana,
CA – Ranking & Ratings
Valley High - Compare to 2013 -
API Score: 658 – The 33.94th percentile when compared to other
schools of the same type. Percentile: (2016)
-
FYI - Cypress High in Cypress, CA
- Ranking & Ratings
Compare with other schools in
Cypress · Compare with nearby schools; School Type: High Schools (Public) ...
Compare to 2013 - API Score: 899 – The 85.09th Percentile: (2016)
-
Sample – Database Retrieval –
TorkBase
We started our TorkBase data and
information management system back in 1997 when our father George gave us our
first Personal Computer (Cyrix) running Windows 95 and a pre-1993 version of MS
Office. It always amazes us when our
query engine hits exactly what we are looking for. Note: It is easy to erase an original document yet rather hard
for the average computer user to move files back in time. We are proud of the “Period3gds” find. You can tell by the length of the file name
that we used old school conventions.
-
Let Us Get It On!
Now let us get back to the meat and potatoes of this matter
at hand.
-
Special Topic – “Keeping
Appearances”
How is it that Human Service
workers should dress? Work wardrobe is
part of one’s image. In addition you
are also representing the wealth of your company. If you work the warehouse or you are a garbage person in general
you dress to reflect appropriate dress standards. Back in 2001 while doing our secondary teacher education “Gig” we
had a role model, instructor, and mentor.
His name was Mr. Jahn. While
addressing appropriate dress for teaching high school science he made light of
his tie wearing policy. In short “I
wear a tie because the students deserve it!”
While transitioning into a public behavioral health arena we made note,
at times with photos, of how our Helping Profession professional and
non-professional colleagues dressed.
Nearly all of them always dress appropriately. Why the detour? Working
Wardrobe is another area Jeff Gibbs could use a makeover. Rather than share a photo of Mr. Gibbs
dressed for work we will share some our Standards for Excellence.
-
Controls For Appropriate Dress
[HOLD BACK GIBBS PHOTO]
[INSERT MOM AND OR SCM MEETING]
-
-
Orange County Mental Health Association Annual Meeting of the Minds (MOMs)
Appropriate Dress about Social Work
-
-
Snapshot of a Typical - MHSA - Steering Committee Meeting
-
Table - Quality Of Life Related Assessments (BND QOL Report
I)
Tracking & Elimination List
-
|
||||||
Acrocode
|
Meaning
|
Assignment
|
Status
|
|||
-
|
||||||
1-BND-QOL
(15 Item)
|
Brand New Day – Quality Of Life (QOL)
|
2012
Intake
|
Abandoned as routine
|
|||
CIBHS – CPS (QOL)
|
Consumer Perception Survey
|
|||||
ProQOL
|
Professional
|
|||||
QOS-QOL
|
Quality Of Sleep
|
|||||
RENHEW-QOL
|
Proprietary
|
|||||
WHOQOL
(16 Item)
|
World Health Organization
|
|||||
-
|
||||||
HOS
|
Health Outcomes Survey
(CMS/NCQA/SPH)
|
2014, 2016, 2018
|
Frustrating
|
|||
-
|
Table – QOL Related Assessments – Last Updated: 20180808-W:
-
“n=1”
When we were first introduced
to the Human Service and Social Health sides of Health & Human Services
(HHS) back in 2009 our goal was to master Standards and Measurement. We had been creating assessment tools back
as far as the year 2001. At this time
we worked with Tork Reconstruction Company or TRC. For a while we had test populations on which to try assessments
on. Our goal was to gather our magic
number of 100 submissions per assessment.
In other words wished our population size (“n=100) per assessment to
reach 100. Now almost twenty (20) years later we focus on assessing us
(“n=1”). Rather than value sample size
we value number of incidences per assessment.
Mania Kaiser was one of the first assessments we wrote. We shared it with our Kaiser Caseworker
Joyce Alessi. Joyce indicated our Mania
Assessment was good work.
-
-
Graduate By DEATH Program (GBDP)
– 20150731 till 20160607
The first incidence of GBDP
in our database is 7/31/2015. After
Oswaldo Escalante (RAS) had helped us a good deal from 2012-2013 we had trouble
getting his successors to be of any assistance. The first incidence of Jeff Gibbs (The Help) appears in our
database on 4/21/2016. We remedied
dozens of issues about Brand New Day and their Network. We wanted to wait for more positive outcomes
before we published our findings about BND.
So we created and published our GBDP series. The point we are trying to make was that BND’s services as
provisioned lacked graduations and thus the member might only look forward to
dying to graduate. In reality life is
the true Graduate By DEATH Program. For us strong evidence indicates we “ALL” will
graduate by DEATH. Whether disabled or
not we will graduate. Gradually we have
focused more on championing those that have Died Too Young (DTY). For us here at MSG the cutoff for too young
is less than 65.
-
Reaching 100
Incidences
As we have noted
that the cutoff for maturing an assessment would be 100 incidences. When applied now this translates to either
100 applications about an individual or 1 application about 100 individuals. We have applied Brand New Day’s Quality Of
Life (Self-assessment) about twenty-five (25) times over the course of six (6)
years. Remember, only the one we
submitted at intake was solicited.
-
Longitudinal
Presentation
We here at MSG
still have not standardized our data presentation themes. If we only have three data points or less we
more often that not use the columnar method.
With four or more data points we more often that not use the row
method. Thus far with BND-QOL results
we have about recorded twenty (20) rows
of data. Initially we let our row
tables run on. After this we decided to
limit our tables (matrices) to fifteen (15) rows of data. We are testing a limit of ten (10) rows of
data. This lets us limit our tables to
one 8.5” x 11” page using font 12. This
gives us a bit of room to add commentary below the table. This standard does not apply to Acronym
Tables.
-
Results
-
Table – Results Tables - Acronyms
(AcroCodes)
AcroCode
|
Meaning
|
||
BND
|
Brand New Day (HMO)
|
||
DCT-QOL
|
Direct Contribution To Quality
Of Life
|
||
GBDP
|
Graduate By DEATH Program
|
||
HV
|
Helper Value
|
||
NMLZD
|
Normalized (Percentages)
|
||
PSP
|
Personal Success Plan
|
||
PV
|
Partnership Value
|
||
Q*M
|
Quick Star Method
|
||
QGM
|
Quick Grade Method
|
||
QOL
|
Quality Of Life
|
||
RT
|
Real Time
|
||
TSM
|
Their Scoring Method
|
||
Table – Results Tables - Acronyms
(AcroCodes)
-
Table – Case Management Checklist
(Brief) – Comparative Evaluation
Skills & Requirement
Checklist
-
|
|||||
Skill
|
Oswaldo
Helper-01
Summative
|
Jeff
Helper-04
Formative
|
Note
|
||
-
|
|||||
Communication Skills
|
A
|
C
|
|||
Compassion
|
B
|
D
|
|||
Time-Management Skills
|
A
|
C
|
|||
Organizational Skills
|
A
|
B
|
|||
Problem-Solving Skills
|
B
|
D
|
|||
-
|
|||||
CALC =
|
18/5
|
9/5
|
|||
GPA =
|
3.6
|
1.8
|
Likely to be too low for Gibbs
|
||
-
|
Table – Case Management Checklist (Brief) – Comparative
Evaluation – Dated Scored and Last Reviewed: 20180810-F:
-
Matrix - Quality Of Life Assessment Results – Longitudinal
(2011-2014)
Subject = TheDAG for MSG (2011-2014) – DAG AKA Keith E
Torkelson, MS
-
|
|||||||
Date
|
Items
Scored
|
%
NMLZD
|
Comment
|
||||
-
|
|||||||
1
|
2011 – Retro
|
(15)
|
64%
|
||||
2
|
2012-RT
|
(15)
|
57%
|
Peak
|
|||
3
|
2012-RT
|
(15)
|
20%
|
Trough
Homeless for 1 month
Suffered Catastrophic Losses
|
|||
4
|
20120906-TH
|
(15)
|
56%
|
BL-Baseline
|
|||
-
|
(15)
|
||||||
5
|
20130506-M
|
(15)
|
13%
|
||||
6
|
20130602-SU
|
(15)
|
21%
|
||||
7
|
20140106-M
|
(15)
|
43%
|
||||
8
|
20140402-W
|
(15)
|
60%
|
||||
9
|
20140630-M
|
(15)
|
26%
|
Helper Turnover
|
|||
-
|
High Enough Resolution Longitudinal Process Measures for
Quality of Life (QOL-15) – Last Reviewed: 20180810-F:
-
Notes
For Keith Torkelson, MS - BND QOL 15 Item
GBDP Quality of Life (15
Item) – Quality Of Life
Originally Prescribed by
Brand New Day (GBDP)
-
Matrix - Quality Of Life Assessment Results – Longitudinal
(2015-2016)
Subject = Keith E Torkelson, MS
-
|
|||||||
Date
|
Items Scored
|
%
NMLZD
|
Comment
|
||||
-
|
|||||||
10
|
20150623-TU-RT
|
(15)
|
71%
|
Prep for Helper #4 – Jeff Gibbs
|
|||
11
|
20151219-SA-RT
|
(15)
|
62%
|
||||
12
|
2015 – Yearly AVG - Retro
|
(15)
|
62%
|
||||
13
|
2015 – Yearly AVG - Calculated
|
(15)
|
67%
|
||||
-
|
|||||||
14
|
20160309-W-RT
|
(15)
Baseline
|
66%
|
Submitted with new service plan
Another Baseline for Eye Crisis
|
|||
15
|
20160612-SU-RT
|
(15)
|
70%
|
||||
-
|
Matrix - Quality Of Life Assessment Results - Longitudinal
-
Notes
For Keith Torkelson, MS (2015-2018)
BND QOL 15 Item
BND QOL 15 Item
-
Matrix - Quality Of Life Assessment Results – Longitudinal
(2017-2018)
For Keith Torkelson, MS (2015-2018)
-
|
||||||
Date
|
Items Scored
|
%
NMLZD
|
Comment
|
|||
-
|
||||||
16
|
201706-1st Half of June Retro
|
(15)
|
79%
|
Before retina issue
Baseline for Eye Crisis
B4
|
||
17
|
20170627-TU-RT
|
Marker
|
Marker
|
Date of detached retina diagnosis
Blind in Left Eye
|
||
-
|
||||||
18
|
20170702-SU-RT
|
(15)
|
52%
|
Retina Crisis Significant
Impact of detached retina – Blind in left eye
|
||
19
|
20170818-F-RT
|
(15)
|
87%
|
Used with COPD baseline report
|
||
-
|
||||||
20
|
20180704-W-RT
|
(15)
|
92%
|
Baseline for Bera Ongoing with Mojica
|
||
21
|
20180729-SU-RT
|
(15)
|
84%
|
Smoking and sleeping related issues
|
||
-
|
High Resolution Longitudinal Process Measures for Quality of
Life (QOL-15) – Last Update: 20170714-F:
-
Notes
BND QOL 15 Item
Matrix - Quality Of Life Assessment - BND QOL 15 Item
Results for Keith Torkelson, M.Sci. (2017-2018)
-
Discussion
-
Actualizing Self - Quality &
Purpose - Level (%)
We will continue to figure out
what a Quality Of Life assessment yields.
For now we have settled. QOL
indicates: Actualization Of Purpose & Meaning (AOP&M) Level. When we report we often normalize the scores
to percents. The scores are more
portable when percents, items scored, and maximum total points (SCOREMAX) are
reported.
-
FYI
Assessment Evaluation
for Brand New Day by Keith E. Torkelson – M.Sci.
20180810-F: Page Views = 29:
Chartered = 8/4/17
-
HER=High Enough Resolution
What we consider HER is
collecting enough data points for trend determination. For linear relationships this would be three
(3) data points in one year. For data
that indicates that there are peaks and troughs twelve (12) data points in a
year we find desirable. The only tests
or assessments for which we collect monthly data points is for our Complete
Blood Count (CBC) blood-work and our weight measurements.
-
On Scoring - NMLZD=Normalized
Metadata: Assessment_Scoring_17121201_Rules V2018
20180810-F: Normalizing To
Percentages
In the context of Quality Of Life
(QOL) assessment we normalized our scoring about percentages. Let us say you see doctor A for two years
and he assigns you his FAV QOL assessment.
Then you begin seeing via graduation to Doctor B. Doctor B has his own FAV QOL
assessment. Unless the results you carry
are normalized to something in league with percentages they are not very
portable. Wild scoring protocols can generate
the Oranges and Apples scenario all over again. Percentages also make it clearer when making conversions to other
units such as Stars Scoring.
-
On Scoring
Matrix – Rubric for MSG Binary
Scoring
-
|
||||
Nature
|
Range
|
Best
|
QUAL
|
|
-
|
||||
Binary
|
0.00 | 0.50 | 1.00
|
1.00
|
No | SoSo | Yes
Options 0.25 – 0.75 PRN
|
|
Stars
|
0.0 – 5.0
|
5.0
|
Example
Compare with CMS Stars Scores
|
|
Percentile
|
000.0 – 100.0
|
100.0
|
Inter-assessment comparisons
and migrations (Portability)
Fidelity with Education
Standards
|
|
-
|
Matrix – Rubric for MSG Binary
Scoring – Last Updated: 20180810-F:
-
Table – Links To Priors Publications in Scope - Graduate By
DEATH Program
Metadata: 20151109-M: Links to Other GBDP Chapters
-
|
||
Chapter
|
||
-
|
||
01
|
||
02
|
||
03A
|
||
-
|
Table – Links To Prior Publications in Scope - Graduate By
DEATH Program – Moved Forward: 20180810-F:
-
Note - Literature Review
While doing our literature review for this paper we took a
moment to look back at some of our in scope publications. By doing such we have detected recurrent
themes about Brand New Day AKA the Graduate by DEATH Program (GBDP). A few of the themes are: Jeff Gibbs'
performance shortfalls, Brand New Day’s CMS Star Score ratings, the amount of
effort we invest to set thing’s RIGHT, and our and others’ Unmet Housing Needs
(UHNs).
-
-
Figure – Scan of Brand New Day (BND) – Quality Of Life (QOL)
Assessment
-
[MATERIALS]
[INSERT MARKER FOR BND QOL SCAN]
-
-
Outcome - Good to Excellent
PSP – Personal Success Plan – Might Best Be Included In (X)
TSM=Their Scoring Method
-
Table – Results – Eight (8)
Community Helpers Participation About Our QOL
Hindsight Applied – Balance
Scoresheet
Service Coordination – Rate Your
Community Helper Team
-
|
-
|
||||||
##
|
Partner
|
Role
|
QGM
HV
|
PV
|
DCT-QOL
|
||
-
|
|||||||
01
|
Oswaldo Escalante
|
PSC-01
|
A
|
B
|
Good
|
||
02
|
Ali Khalkhali
|
PSC-02
|
B
|
B
|
Little
|
||
03
|
Francis Villa
|
PSC-03
|
F
|
D
|
Little
|
||
04
|
Derek Chumley [SP]
|
Floater
|
A
|
A
|
Best
|
||
05
|
Jeff Gibbs
|
PSC-04
|
D
|
D
|
Little
|
||
06
|
Jessica Reynolds
|
Passive
|
B
|
B
|
Little
|
||
-
|
|||||||
07B
|
Sofia Aliabadi (Facebook)
|
Director-02
|
C
|
C
|
Little
|
||
07A
|
Sofia Emamian (From Bios)
|
**
|
Director-02
|
C
|
F
|
Little
|
|
08
|
Diana Meier
|
Director-01
|
A
|
B
|
Good
|
||
-
|
Table – Results - Participation
About Our QOL – Graded and Last Update: 20180810-F:
-
** Sophia – Sofia Emamian joined
the BND Brookhurst at Lampson team a few years back. We feature her in our Rate Your Director Series. Sophia comes up as a hit on the
Internet. We think the correct spelling
for her name is Sofia. This (2018) we
got a hit on Facebook for her. We
believe Sophia Emanian is now Sofia Aliabadi.
-
Matrix - Helper Quality –
Relative to Us – Comparing Two (2)
-
|
||||||
##
|
Synoterm
|
Oswaldo
Retro
2012-2013
|
Jeff
FY 2017/18
|
|||
-
|
||||||
01
|
Caliber
|
|||||
Craftsmanship
(AMB Product)
|
0.50
|
0.25
|
||||
Distinction
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
||||
Eminence
|
||||||
05
|
Excellence
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
|||
-
|
||||||
06
|
Incomparability
|
0.75
|
0.25
|
|||
Merit
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
||||
Skill
|
0.75
|
0.25
|
||||
Superiority
|
0.75
|
1.00
|
||||
10
|
Talent
|
1.00
|
0.25
|
|||
-
|
||||||
11
|
Value
|
0.75
|
0.25
|
|||
Virtue (AMB BSA)
|
0.50
|
0.25
|
||||
Virtuosity
|
0.50
|
0.50
|
||||
14
|
Worth
|
0.75
|
0.00
|
|||
-
|
-
|
|||||
Helper Value Score
(HVS) =
|
9.25/12
|
5.00/12
|
||||
Percentage =
|
77.1%
|
41.7%
|
||||
Star Equivalent Score
=
|
3.9
|
2.1
|
||||
-
|
Matrix - Helper Quality –
Relative to Us – Comparing Two (2) – Date Scored and Last Reviewed: 20180810-F:
-
More Discussion
Apparently the work of such
quality as Oswaldo’s is rare about Brand New Day (BND). For the period we partnered with Oswaldo,
BND earned a CMS Stars rating of 3.0.
Thus Oswaldo appeared to be contributing in a positive manner to the BND
operation. On the other hand for this
year (2018) CMS awarded BND with 3.5 Stars.
With a 2.1 Star Equivalent Score Jeff Gibbs may not be living up to his
potiential. We see no signs that his
collegues admire him. We are hoping that by Fall Quarter 2018 we can apply
terms like excellent, superior, valuable, and distinctive about Jeff
Gibbs. We would wish for him to deliver
well crafted evidence addressing his performance. We would like to see him gain some ground about his digital
presence. An indicator that you are
proud of your work is making an effort to share it with a larger
population. A promising way of
accomplishing this is via the Internet.
-
Alternatives
As of today, August 10, 2018, we
are still “stuck” with Jeff Gibbs. Jeff
Gibbs has many distinctive attributes and characteristics. Few of his attributes and characteristics
have for us any problem solving value.
In some written material from BND we saw that we could choose a better
fitting helper. We will consider
pushing a referral ourselves in Fall Quarter 2018. We actually have approached our FAV – Derek. He says that the role of case manager is our
of his scope.
-
Appendix - Table – BND-QOL -
Assessment Header Information
-
|
|||||
Factor
|
Fact
|
Note
|
|||
-
|
|||||
Members Name
|
Keith Torkelson MS
|
||||
Today’s Date
|
20180729-SUN
|
||||
PSC
|
Jeff Gibbs
|
||||
Location
|
BND
Brookhurst and Lampson
Garden Grove
|
||||
Intake V Progress
|
Progress
|
Intake was in 2012
|
|||
-
|
Appendix - Table – BND-QOL -
Assessment Header Information
-
Instructions Taken From Form
“This survey asks you to tell us
how things are going for you these days.
It should take you about 5 minutes to complete. When finished, please give the survey to
your Personal Services Coordinator (PSC) so that you can review the results
together. In this section, we ask you
to rate how things are going in different areas of your life. For each statement below, circle the answer
that best matches your experience.
Circle one choice for each answer.
Column Header: Should this be in your Personal Success Plan (PSP)?”
-
Appendix - Table – Quality of
Life Self-Assessment (20180729-SUN)
Brand New Day Version
(Scale 0-3 with 3 being the best)
-
|
|||||
##
|
Overall, how would your rate…
|
QUANT
20180729
SUN
|
PSP (X)
|
||
-
|
|||||
01
|
The place where you live (your
housing)
|
2.5
|
X
|
||
02
|
The amount of money you gave to
buy what you need
|
2.5
|
|||
03
|
Your involvement in work,
employment
|
3.0
|
|||
04
|
Your level of education
|
3.0
|
|||
05
|
Your access to transportation
to get around
|
3.0
|
|||
06
|
Your social life
|
3.0
|
|||
07
|
Your participation in community
activities (leisure, sports, spiritual, volunteer work)
|
3.0
|
|||
08
|
Your ability to have fun and
relax
|
2.5
|
|||
09
|
Your physical health
|
1.5
|
X
|
||
10
|
Your level of independence
|
2.0
|
|||
11
|
Your ability to take care of
yourself (staying health, eating right, avoiding danger)
|
3.0
|
|||
11
|
Your self-esteem
(How you feel about yourself?)
|
3.0
|
|||
12
|
The effect of Alcohol &
other drugs on your life
|
1.5
|
X
|
||
13
|
Your mental health symptoms
|
2.0
|
X
|
||
14
|
Overall, how are things going
in your life?
|
2.5
|
|||
-
|
|||||
CALC =
|
38.0/45
|
||||
BND Satisfaction
Score (Normalized) =
|
84.4%
|
||||
AVG & =
|
2.5
|
||||
Star Equivalents=
|
4.2
|
||||
-
|
Table – Quality of Life
Self-assessment (20180729-SUN) - Date Scored 20180729 (Real Time) – Last
Update: 20180810-F:
-
Appendix – FYI Table –
Non-professional Helpers - One And The Same - Roles
-
|
||||
Title
|
Note
|
|||
-
|
||||
Care Coordinator
|
||||
Case Manager
|
||||
Case Worker
|
||||
Helper
|
||||
Personal Service Coordinator
|
||||
The Help
|
||||
Worker
|
||||
Unlicensed Social Worker
|
||||
Uncertificated Social Worker
|
||||
Others
|
||||
-
|
Table – Non-professional Helpers
- One And The Same – Roles
-
-
FYI - Appendix – Figure Readability
Stats for This Report
-
-
-
End Of Report
Images @ The End
-
As Usual
#worldwafers Promotion
-30-
