Common use of Local Performance Assessment Clause in Contracts

Local Performance Assessment. Grantees must periodically review the performance data they report to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ (as outlined above), assess their progress, and use this information to improve management of their grant projects. The assessment should be designed to help you determine whether you are achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes you intend to achieve and whether adjustments need to be made to your project. Performance assessments also should be used to determine whether your project is having/will have the intended impact on behavioral health disparities. You will be required to report on your progress achieved, barriers encountered, and efforts to overcome these barriers in a performance assessment report to be submitted at least annually. You will also be required to participate in monthly conference calls with a project officer to discuss current progress as well as for review and feedback about performance assessments. At a minimum, your performance assessment should include the required performance measures identified above. In addition, grantees must submit answers to the following questions in their quarterly reports to the SAMHSA GPO: • Within the grant catchment area, how did the activities of the grant impact suicide deaths and non-fatal suicide attempts, including suicide deaths and attempts within key sectors such as health and behavioral health? • How has the competence/confidence of health and behavioral health clinical staff changed over the course of the grant? In particular, how have the grant activities impacted clinical skills in the areas of: • assessment of suicide risk and protective factors; • formulation of a risk summary to inform the choice of intervention; • use of best practice interventions to ensure safety including lethal means safety, treatment of suicide risk, and follow-up to ensure continuity of care? • How have the grant activities impacted the grantee’s success in achieving the objectives of the NSSP they are trying to implement, including Goals 8 and 9? You may also consider outcome and process questions, such as the following: • What was the effect of the intervention on key outcome goals? • What program/contextual/cultural/linguistic factors were associated with outcomes? • What individual factors were associated with outcomes, including race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity? • How durable were the effects? • Was the intervention effective in maintaining the project outcomes at six-month follow-up? As appropriate, describe how the data, including outcome data, will be analyzed by racial/ethnic group or other demographic factors to ensure that appropriate populations are being served and that disparities in services and outcomes are minimized. • How closely did implementation match the plan? • What types of changes were made to the originally proposed plan? • What types of changes were made to address disparities in access, service use, and outcomes across subpopulations, including the use of the National CLAS Standards? • What led to the changes in the original plan? • What effect did the changes have on the planned intervention and performance assessment? • Who provided (program staff) what services (modality, type, intensity, duration), to whom (individual characteristics), in what context (system, community), and at what cost (facilities, personnel, dollars)? • What strategies were used to maintain fidelity to the evidence-based practice or intervention across providers over time? • How many individuals were reached through the program? No more than 20 percent of the total grant award may be used for data collection, performance measurement, and performance assessment, e.g., activities required in Sections I-2.2 and 2.3 above.

Local Performance Assessment. Grantees must periodically review the performance data they report to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ SAMHSA (as outlined required above), ) and assess their progress, progress and use this information to improve management of their grant projects. The assessment should be designed to help you determine whether you are achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes you intend to achieve and whether adjustments need to be made to your project. Performance assessments also should be used to determine whether your project is having/will have the intended impact on behavioral health disparities. You will be required to report on your progress achieved, barriers encountered, and efforts to overcome these barriers in a performance assessment report to be submitted at least annually. You will also be required to participate in monthly conference calls with annually as a project officer to discuss current progress as well as for review and feedback about performance assessmentsseparate document. At a minimum, your performance assessment should include the required performance measures identified above. In addition, grantees must submit answers to the following questions in their quarterly reports to the SAMHSA GPO: • Within the grant catchment area, how did the activities of the grant impact suicide deaths and non-fatal suicide attempts, including suicide deaths and attempts within key sectors such as health and behavioral health? • How has the competence/confidence of health and behavioral health clinical staff changed over the course of the grant? In particular, how have the grant activities impacted clinical skills in the areas of: • assessment of suicide risk and protective factors; • formulation of a risk summary to inform the choice of intervention; • use of best practice interventions to ensure safety including lethal means safety, treatment of suicide risk, and follow-up to ensure continuity of care? • How have the grant activities impacted the grantee’s success in achieving the objectives of the NSSP they are trying to implement, including Goals 8 and 9? You may also consider outcome and process questions, such as the following: • What was the effect of the intervention on key outcome goals? • What program/contextual/cultural/linguistic factors were associated with outcomes? • What individual factors were associated with outcomes, including race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity? • How durable were the effects? • Was the intervention effective in maintaining the project outcomes at six-month follow-up? • How has the array of publicly supported treatment and recovery services and supports for the population of focus expanded over the program period? • What treatment/recovery services for the population of focus were reimbursed by Medicaid/CHIP at the outset and conclusion of the project? Was there an increase? • What treatment/recovery services for the population of focus were reimbursed by other federal/state/territorial/tribal funds (please specify) at the beginning and ending of the project? Was there an increase? • To what degree has there been an increase in the number of clinicians trained/ certified in EBPs? • How has the grantee/provider partnership identified barriers/solutions to widen the use of effective EBPs for the population of focus? As appropriate, describe how the data, including outcome data, will be analyzed by racial/ethnic group or other demographic factors to ensure that appropriate populations are being served and that disparities in services and outcomes are minimized. • How closely did implementation match the plan? • What types of changes were made to the originally proposed plan? • What types of changes were made to address disparities in access, service use, and outcomes across subpopulations, including the use of the National CLAS Standards? • What led to the changes in the original plan? • What effect did the changes have on the planned intervention and performance assessment? • Who provided (program staff) what services (modality, type, intensity, duration), to whom (individual characteristics), in what context (system, community), and at what cost (facilities, personnel, dollars)? • What strategies were used to maintain fidelity to the evidence-based practice EBP or intervention across providers over time? • How many individuals were reached through the program? • Have EBPs been adopted and disseminated state -wide? • In what ways is the state moving toward a more coordinated effort to serve the population of focus and their families/primary caregivers? What are the drivers? • Is capacity being increased? What has been the impact on health disparities in the population served? The performance assessment report should be a component of or an attachment to the Bi-Annual Infrastructure Progress Development Measures submitted in October of each grant year. No more than 20 15 percent of the total grant award may be used for data collection, performance measurement, and performance assessment, e.g., activities required in Sections I-2.2 and 2.3 above.

Local Performance Assessment. Grantees must periodically review the performance data they report to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ SAMHSA (as outlined required above), assess their progress, and use this information to improve management of their grant projects. The assessment should be designed to help you determine whether you are achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes you intend to achieve and whether adjustments need to be made to your project. Performance assessments also should be used to determine whether your project is having/will have the intended impact on behavioral health disparities. You Grantees will be required to report on your the progress achieved, barriers encountered, and efforts to overcome these barriers in a performance assessment report to be submitted at least semi-annually. You The assigned SAMHSA GPO and Grants Management Specialist will also be required review the performance assessment report and provide feedback on the extent to participate in monthly conference calls which progress is consistent with a project officer to discuss current progress as well as for review stated goals of the application and feedback about performance assessmentsrequirements of this FOA. At a minimum, your the performance assessment should include the required performance measures identified above. In addition, grantees must submit answers to the following questions in their quarterly reports to the SAMHSA GPO: • Within the grant catchment area, how did the activities of the grant impact suicide deaths above and non-fatal suicide attempts, including suicide deaths and attempts within key sectors such as health and behavioral health? • How has the competence/confidence of health and behavioral health clinical staff changed over the course of the grant? In particular, how have the grant activities impacted clinical skills in the areas of: • assessment of suicide risk and protective factors; • formulation of a risk summary to inform the choice of intervention; • use of best practice interventions to ensure safety including lethal means safety, treatment of suicide risk, and follow-up to ensure continuity of care? • How have the grant activities impacted the grantee’s success in achieving the objectives of the NSSP they are trying to implement, including Goals 8 and 9? You may also consider outcome and process questions, such as the following: •  How many individuals were reached through the program and how many were enrolled in Medicaid and other benefit programs as a result of participation in this program?  What effect did linkage to HUD’s Coordinated Entry system have on housing goals?  What program/contextual factors were associated with increased access to and enrollment in Medicaid and other benefit programs?  What was the effect of the intervention permanent housing, recovery support, or treatment on key outcome goals? • What program/contextual/cultural/linguistic factors were associated with outcomes? • What individual factors were associated with outcomes, including race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity? • How durable were the effects? •  Was the intervention permanent housing and recovery support effective in maintaining the project outcomes at six-month client follow-upup interviews?  What program and contextual factors were associated with positive clinical and housing outcomes? As appropriate, describe how the data, including outcome data, will be analyzed by racial/ethnic group or other demographic factors to ensure that appropriate populations are being served in a culturally and contextually appropriate manner and that disparities in services and outcomes are minimized. •  What activities and actions taken by the State Interagency Council or the Steering Committee helped improve the clinical and housing outcomes for individuals served?  How closely did implementation match the plan? • What types of changes were made to strategies and interventions used by the originally proposed plan? • What types of changes were made to address disparities State Interagency Council or Steering Committee assist in access, service use, and outcomes across subpopulations, including the use overall quality improvement of the National CLAS Standardssystem of care for individuals served? • What led to the changes in the original plan? • What effect did the changes have on the planned intervention and performance assessment? •  Who provided (program staff) what services (modality, type, intensity, duration), to whom (individual characteristics), in what context (system, community), and at what cost (facilities, personnel, dollars)? • What strategies were  Are the targets and indicators linked and used to maintain fidelity inform quality improvement activities?  What efforts have been taken to overcome administrative and clinical barriers in enrolling individuals in Medicaid and other benefit programs and how are these efforts informing the implementation and/or enhancing the long term sustainability of integrated community systems that provide permanent housing and supportive services? SAMHSA intends to implement a cross-site evaluation for the duration of the CABHI program. This comprehensive national evaluation will be designed to determine the impact of CABHI grants on clients, services, and systems. Participation in this independent, multi-site evaluation is a requirement for all grantees. The cross-site evaluation will be conducted through a SAMHSA contract. The contractor will manage cross-site data collection and analysis, and development of cross-site evaluation products. Data collected will include client, services, and systems process and outcome data. The evaluation will be designed to comply with OMB expectations regarding independence, scope, and quality of evaluation activities. It is possible the evaluation design may necessitate changes in the required data elements, instruments, and/or timing of data collection or reporting. Grantee participation in the cross-site evaluation will entail activities such as, but not limited to, participating in technical assistance and training webinars or phone calls, sharing of existing information, and participating in systems assessments (this might include key grantee staff, key partners, individuals who receive services, and other appropriate individuals). The contractor will provide technical assistance, training, and support to grantee sites. Performance data will be reported to the evidence-based practice or intervention across providers over time? • How many individuals were reached through public, OMB, and Congress as part of ▇▇▇▇▇▇’s budget request. In your application, you must clearly document your agreement and ability to collect and report the program? No more than 20 required data for GPRA, conduct a local performance assessment, and participate in the national evaluation in Section E: Data Collection and Performance Measurement of your application. State grants: Up to 10 percent of the total grant award amount may be used for data collection, performance measurement, and performance assessment, and evaluation (e.g., activities required in Sections I-2.2 and 2.3 above). Each sub-awardee may use up to 10 percent of its funds for data collection, performance measurement, performance assessment and evaluation (see Sections I-2.2 and 2.3).

Local Performance Assessment. Grantees must periodically review the performance data they report to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ SAMHSA (as outlined required above), assess their progress, and use this information to improve management of their grant projects. The assessment should be designed to help you determine whether you are achieving the goals, objectives, and outcomes you intend to achieve and whether adjustments need to be made to your project. Performance assessments also should be used to determine whether your project is having/will have the intended impact on behavioral health disparities. You will be required to report on your progress achieved, barriers encountered, and efforts to overcome these barriers in a performance assessment report to be submitted at least annually. You will also be required to participate in monthly conference calls with a project officer GPO to discuss current progress as well as for review and feedback about performance assessments. At a minimum, your performance assessment should include Grantees will also be asked to demonstrate the required performance measures identified above. In addition, grantees must submit answers to the following questions in their quarterly reports to the SAMHSA GPO: • Within the impact of grant catchment area, how did the activities of the grant impact suicide deaths and non-fatal suicide attempts, including suicide deaths and attempts within key sectors such as health and behavioral health? • How has by measuring the competence/confidence of health and behavioral health care clinical staff changed over at the course of baseline, during the grant? In particular, how have and the grant’s end. The impact of grant activities impacted clinical on skills in the following areas ofmust be measured: • assessment  Assessment of suicide risk and protective factors; • formulation  Formulation of a risk summary to inform the choice of intervention; • use  Use of best best-practice interventions to ensure safety safety, including lethal means safety, treatment of suicide risk, and follow-up to ensure continuity of care? • How have ;  Suicide deaths and suicide attempts within the grant activities impacted healthcare system. At a minimum, your performance assessment should include the grantee’s success in achieving the objectives of the NSSP they are trying to implement, including Goals 8 and 9? required performance measures identified above. You may also consider outcome and process questions, such as the following: • What was  How has the effect embedding of Zero Suicide into the healthcare system impacted suicidal behavior for individuals receiving treatment?  Did some elements of the intervention on key outcome goalsZero Suicide model have greater impact than other elements? •  What program/contextual/cultural/linguistic factors were associated with the suicidal behavior outcomes, including deaths by suicide and suicide attempts, especially through EHR or data management systems? •  What individual factors were associated with outcomes, including race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity? •  How durable were the effects? • Was the intervention effective in maintaining the project outcomes at six-month follow-up? As appropriate, describe how the data, including outcome data, will be analyzed by racial/ethnic group and sexual and gender minority groups or other demographic factors to ensure that appropriate populations are being served and that disparities in services and outcomes are minimized. •  How closely did implementation match the plan? •  What types of changes were made to the originally proposed plan? •  What types of changes were made to address disparities in access, service use, and outcomes across subpopulations, including the use of the National CLAS Standards? •  What led to the changes in the original plan? •  What effect did the changes have on the planned intervention and performance assessment? •  Who provided (program staff) what services (modality, type, intensity, duration), to whom (individual characteristics), in what context (system, community), and at what cost (facilities, personnel, dollars)? •  What strategies were used to assess and maintain fidelity to the evidence-based practice or intervention across providers Zero Suicide model over time? •  How many individuals experiencing suicidal behaviors were reached identified and treated through the program? A review of the performance assessment will be included in required monthly calls with federal staff and may be requested as part of annual reporting requirements. In addition to SAMHSA program measures, grantees must collect and report findings for the national evaluation which will be conducted under a separate SAMHSA evaluation contract. The national evaluation will focus on demonstrating the impact of Zero Suicide on suicidal behavior among adults. Participation in the national evaluation is required. To support implementation of the national evaluation, grantees will receive training and technical assistance from the SAMHSA Suicide Prevention Evaluation Contractor. Applicants will be expected to fully cooperate with the Suicide Prevention Evaluation Contractor. Participation in the national evaluation will likely entail participation in training visits, completing data reports/inventories, data entry, applying for and receiving Institutional Review Board Clearance (when appropriate), respondent identification and utilizing a Web-based database developed in consultation with the contractor. Data will be collected quarterly and must be entered into a Web system created by the national evaluation contractor and/or included in written progress reports. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ is interested in assessing the extent to which strategies employed by grantees are consistent with the Zero Suicide model, assessing the feasibility of implementing the Zero Suicide model in real world settings, and determining the outcomes associated with implementation. Enhanced evaluation questions may also be required of grantees to address these key evaluation goals. No more than 20 percent of the total grant award may be used for data collection, evaluation, performance measurement, and performance assessment, e.g., activities required in Sections I-2.2 and 2.3 above.