Strategies <strong>for</strong> Success: What will ittake to get us to where we want to be?Success <strong>for</strong>Every StudentYoung PeopleMaking SmartChoicesStable andEconomicallySecure FamiliesChildren Safe inTheir Home, Schooland CommunityIn Fiscal Year 2006, the <strong>Collaboration</strong> <strong>Council</strong> released its Planning Brighter Futures <strong>for</strong>Children, Youth and Families: A Five-Year Community Strategic Plan <strong>for</strong> <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>,Maryland. The following strategies were selected as the most effective to make significantprogress in achieving The Children’s Agenda outcomes <strong>for</strong> Children With Intensive Needs.Strategy 1:Strategy 2:Strategy 3:Strategy 4:Strategy 5:Strategy 6:Implement a Local Access Mechanism to Increase Timely Family Connection tothe Array of Needed ServicesIncrease the Use and Funding of the Wraparound Model to Provide EffectiveService Delivery in the Home and CommunityIncrease Access to High-quality Behavioral Health Treatment Services Regardlessof Insurance CoverageIncrease the Types and Capacity of Respite Care Service OptionsIncrease Local, Collaborative Flexible Funding <strong>for</strong> Service Delivery AcrossChild-Serving Systems to Create a System of CareIncrease the Use of Evidence-based Practice Intervention and Treatment ApproachesWhat We KnowUsing national prevalence data, it is estimated that there are 12,500 of <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s250,000 children and youth who could be classified as having intensive needs. Children withintensive needs are found in families of any race and ethnicity and across the income spectrum.It takes the collaboration of public and private sector resources in service planning and delivery,funding and oversight to effectively manage the multiple-agency involvement of these childrenwhile maintaining them in their home or community.Communities ThatSupport Family LifeChildren With Intensive Needs—Fiscal Year <strong>2008</strong>Total Expenditures $5,912,347Local AccessMechanism4%LocalCoordinating<strong>Council</strong>2%Governor’s Officeof Crime Controland Prevention2%Care Management Entity FundingSources—Fiscal Year <strong>2008</strong>Total Expenditures $4,507,904<strong>Montgomery</strong><strong>County</strong>, Maryland18%FamilyPreservation13%LMB ProgramServices6%Training andConsulting1%Care ManagementEntity includingWraparound74%Department ofJuvenile Services4%Governor’s Office<strong>for</strong> Children76%13
CHILDREN WITH INTENSIVE NEEDS WORKGROUPUnder the direction of the Child Well-being Committee, the Children With Intensive NeedsWorkgroup aims to support children who are medically fragile, have significant developmentaldisabilities, severe emotional disabilities and/or who are substance abusing. Specifically, theworkgroup has a responsibility to:• ensure accountability in the children with intensive needs programs funded by the<strong>Collaboration</strong> <strong>Council</strong>;• understand and refine the Five Year Community Strategic Plan and develop action plans toimplement strategies to achieve select outcomes in The Children’s Agenda.Workgroup ChairsDebbie Van Brunt, Board Member,<strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Collaboration</strong> <strong>Council</strong>Teresa Bennett, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Department of Health and Human Services,Children’s Mental HealthMembersFran Brenneman, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Department of Health and Human ServicesLuis Cardona, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Department ofHealth and Human ServicesMariam Chase, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesClaudia Remington Conroy, CASAJenny Craw<strong>for</strong>d, Family Services, Inc.Francha Davis, CASA of <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Don Downing, Progressive Life CenterNicki Drotleff, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesAngela English, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesPatricia Flanigan, Maryland State Departmentof Juvenile ServicesStacey Guiran-Sherman, Maryland Departmentof Juvenile ServicesPaul Homon, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Public SchoolsMadeleine Jones, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Circuit CourtMatthew Kamins, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Public SchoolsShawn Lattanzio, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Department of Health and Human ServicesYasmin Lluveras, GUIDEBetsy Luecking, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesMaureen Marton, Youth Leader, <strong>Montgomery</strong><strong>County</strong> Federation of Families <strong>for</strong> Children’sMental HealthAmy Morantes, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesEmily Novick, National Alliance on MentalIllness—<strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> (NAMI)Brenda Petersen, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Department of Health and Human Services,Tree HouseSheila Philip, Maryland ChoicesDebbie Riley, Center <strong>for</strong> Adoption, Support andEducation, Inc.Ron Rivlin, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Departmentof Health and Human ServicesRita Rumbaugh, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Public SchoolsAvniel Serkin, Youth Leader, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Federation of Families <strong>for</strong> Children’s Mental HealthCelia Serkin, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Federation ofFamilies <strong>for</strong> Children’s Mental HealthKarisma Sheth, Mental Health Association of<strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>Ann Wilson, <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong> Circuit CourtJoe Wilson, Maryland ChoicesHighlights of OurStrategic Plan’s ProgressFiscal Year <strong>2008</strong> has been successfulas the <strong>Collaboration</strong> <strong>Council</strong> and itspartners at the Federal, State and<strong>County</strong> levels have solidified andstrengthened <strong>Montgomery</strong> <strong>County</strong>’sSystem of Care. This, the second yearof the Care Management Entitydemonstration, has yielded goodoutcomes <strong>for</strong> children and families inour community. The high fidelitywraparound process is betterunderstood by the child-servingcommunity and there continues to bea great demand from the community<strong>for</strong> this process. The child-servingcommunity is able to access services<strong>for</strong> those children that are presentingwith multiple behavioral and mentalhealth needs in the home, school orcommunity setting.The <strong>Collaboration</strong> <strong>Council</strong>’s ability toreceive and manage funding hasallowed the expansion of eligibilitycriteria so that families do not have towait until a child/youth is at risk ofthe highest level of care. The strongpartnership between the <strong>Collaboration</strong><strong>Council</strong> and all child-servingagencies has allowed <strong>for</strong> funding sothat children who are not in the topfive percent of the needs triangle areable to access community-basedtraditional and non-traditionalservices via the Care ManagementEntity, Maryland Choices. There areeight different funding streams whichare managed by the <strong>Collaboration</strong><strong>Council</strong>, each of which has itsunique eligibility criteria andper<strong>for</strong>mance measures.14
Change language