Northern Community Resources
P. O. Box 7034
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
(907) 225-6355
FAX 225-6354
Kodiak, Alaska
Mary Monroe (Community Member)
Jean Kincaid (ILP Peer Reviewer)
Carol Manninen (ILP Technical Assistant)
John Havrilek (Facilitator)
A review of Kodiak Area Native Association’s Infant Learning Program (KANA ILP) in Kodiak was conducted from February 26-28, 2001 using the Integrated Quality Assurance Review process.
This report is the summation of the impressions of a community team after interviewing consumers, staff members, community members, and staff of other related agencies. It also includes a limited administrative review. It does not represent or reflect a comprehensive review of this agency. The community team has collaborated on this report and the findings represent their consensus.
KANA ILP has provided services to this area since 1985. The agency serves 28 children and their families in the Kodiak Borough, in the City of Kodiak and in six villages. ILP has one full time and one part time provider and contract help for occupational therapy, physical therapy and speech therapy services. Contract services have enabled ILP to serve all its families and at this time there are no children on an ILP wait list.
The ILP staff offers the following services: Child Find activities using the “Ages and Stages Questionnaire,” evaluation to determine eligibility, development of the Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP), home visits, family assistance activities, family service coordination, toddler group, transition assistance, photo vision screening and contract services from private therapists.
.
Description of
Process
A team of four conducted the consumer-centered site review. The team members included one community member (one community member was ill and could not attend the review), a peer reviewer, an ILP Technical Assistant and one facilitator.
Over the course of the three-day review the team conducted 33 interviews with 1 board member, 9 representatives of related agencies, 17 ILP consumer parents or guardians, and 6 staff members (2 ILP staff and 4 KANA staff). The interviews lasted from 15 minutes to one hour and were conducted by telephone or in person, in private homes, at the KANA ILP office or at other community agencies.
Open Forum
An Open Forum was held the first night of the review at Mill Bay Coffee. The forum was advertised in the newspapers, on the radio stations and through flyers. The advertising was extremely complete and the agency is commended on their very thorough efforts.
One team member and one community member attended the hour-long forum on a dark, windy, and very stormy night. The comments made at the forum are incorporated into the narrative.
Progress Since Last
Review
The last Integrated
Quality Assurance Review of KANA ILP was conducted in 1997. At that time, all of the areas requiring
response were related to the files. The
ILP TA states that all of those areas from the last review have been met.
The team identified the following strengths in the area of Choice and Self Determination for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
+ “Within
a week of my initial call someone from ILP came over, visited my home,
suggested options and worked around my schedule.”
+ “ (The staff member) really accesses
resources quickly. She makes it her business to know who’s in town and coming
to town, what skills they have and connects them with families.”
+ “They are there at my home in a
heartbeat.”
+ “ILP services are consistent and
dependable.”
+ The ILP staff are offering choices within the limited resources of the program.
+ Families have a lot of knowledge regarding services and service providers.
+ Families credit KANA ILP with quick responses for evaluations and services.
+ Families credit KANA ILP with working around families’ schedules.
+ “They make sure whatever services you qualify for you
get and they’re quality.”
The team identified the following weaknesses in the area of Choice and Self Determination for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
- “She comes in with a plan and does it. I don’t have any input in it, but that is fine with me.”
- Some children are not offered the option of playgroup.
- “I don’t have a choice. They offer the services in my home.”
- “There’s no care management or care coordination after ILP.” (This is a shared responsibility.)
The team identified the following strengths in the area of Dignity, Respect and Rights for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
+ “Staff
is extremely friendly.”
+ “I am very impressed with her
interaction with my child.”
+ “More than respect, they love us.”
+ “She even helped us do paperwork for
insurance and SSI, after working with our child.”
+ “She was
very nice to us, like one of our own family.”
+ “I don’t
know what we‘d do without her. She’s my
guardian angel.”
+ “She
explains things so I can understand them.” (comment from a bilingual parent)
+ “They show me what my child is good
at.”
+ “The
most respect of any agency I’ve ever worked with, most non-offensive,
non-intrusive. They treat our kids like their own.”
+ Children and families are treated with dignity and respect.
+ Staff are very respectful and sensitive to village and Native cultural differences.
+ “They are there for me.”
+ “They are very sensitive to family values, very
respectful.”
+ “I never have to call them twice. They are usually calling me to see if I need
anything.”
+ “They are very friendly and easy to talk with and
their skills are great especially in developmental training.”
+ “Nobody serves the villages as well as this program.”
+ “Jane makes sure a child isn’t stigmatized. She has all the kids in the village
participate in the playgroups.”
The team identified the following weakness in the area of Dignity, Respect and Rights for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
- One foster parent was unclear and uninformed regarding ILP services even though the child in their care was receiving them.
Health, Safety and
Security
The team identified the following strengths in the area of Health, Safety and Security for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
+ “She is very thoughtful of my
child’s needs.”
+ “There is a lot of collaboration by
ILP with other health agencies: vision clinic, P.T., O.T., WIC, audiologist,
and village health aides.”
+ “Whenever we go to the doctor, she is
always there. She helps me understand and explain what the doctor says.”
+ “ They
model health and safety during home visits.”
+ “ This
community definitely sees ILP as a resource.”
+ The ILP staff follow health, safety and security guidelines while working with families and children.
+ ILP staff assist families with SSI, Welfare, Immigration, medical insurance, medical appointments and Medicaid.
The team did not identify any weaknesses in the area of Health, Safety and Security for those receiving ILP services from KANA.
|
|
The team identified the following strengths in the area of Relationships for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
+ “ILP
works with parents, siblings and grandparents and encourages them to attend
playgroups.”
+ “They
involve all of us, the whole family.”
+ “When
she flies out to our village the whole community is excited to see her.”
+ “She invites everyone to playgroup so
our child isn’t stigmatized.”
+ ILP staff provide child-centered services involving the whole family.
+ ILP staff help the family with everything from involvement in the child’s activities to assisting families to obtain benefits.
The team did not identify any weaknesses in the area of Relationships for those receiving ILP services from KANA.
Community
Participation
The team identified
the following strengths in the area of Community Participation for those
receiving ILP services from KANA:
+ “Everyone
in the village is invited to playgroup.”
+ ILP involves families in the community through collaboration with other agencies including Kodiak College, WIC, the Public Health nurse, area pediatricians, Village Health Aides, Village Pre-School, the school district, Head Start, the Women’s Resource Center, DFYS, U.S. Coast Guard, Small World Child Care Center, Alaska Housing and Finance Corporation, Indian and Child Welfare and Hope Community Services.
+ ILP involves families in the community through their newsletter.
+ ILP involves families in the community through the playgroups in the villages.
The team identified the following weakness in the area of Community Participation for those receiving ILP services from KANA:
- One parent said “Transition was a nightmare. My child’s file was lost and there was no follow up from ILP or the school.” (This is a shared responsibility.)
Staff Interviews
A total of 6 staff members from KANA and ILP were interviewed. The staff interviewed had been with the agency from 2 years to 16 years. The two ILP staff were interviewed as well as the President of KANA, KANA’s Chief Financial Officer, KANA’s Acting Director of Human Resources and an accountant.
The overwhelming attitude in responses to the Five Life Areas is that the staff feel that services are very consumer-driven and consumer-responsive. Most staff feel that the administration and the KANA organization support them.
Interviews with staff from related agencies yielded the following comments:
+“(The ILP
staff member has) good follow through, helps out when asked and provides
training.”
+“(I’m)
glad ILP is here, (it’s) very necessary.”
+“Great
collaboration, ILP fills in the gaps.”
+“(They
are) absolutely collaborative. I’m very impressed with them. We use them as a
resource. Nancy is a wealth of information."
- “When I refer a child I’m not kept in the loop. (There’s) not much feedback. (I) don’t get a copy of the assessments or
evaluation.”
- “I don’t think there’s great communication between us.
I sometimes think clients get lost.”
- One agency staff member expressed concern about how and
when the agency is doing Child Find: “Are children falling through the
cracks?”
- An agency staff member said they hadn’t seen any 90-day transitions with the school.
- “Staff of other agencies feel ILP staff are talking
negatively about them.”
Administrative and
Personnel Narrative
The review of the Administrative and Personnel Standards Checklist indicates that the KANA Board has no significant consumer membership (Standard #6) and the agency does not use consumer input in their hiring of staff (Standard #22).
Program Management
The ILP staff has been very stable over the last several
years.
1. Standard #6 “The agency’s governing body includes significant membership by consumers, or consumer family members and embraces their meaningful participation.” The KANA Board is not set up to comply with this standard. It is suggested that ILP set up their own parent advisory group.
2. Standard #22 “The organization has and utilizes a procedure to incorporate consumer choice into the hiring and evaluation of direct service providers, and to ensure that special individualized services…have been approved by the family or consumer.” It is suggested that ILP set up a parent advisory group and use their input in an advisory capacity.
The review team expresses thanks to Nancy, Jane and the KANA organization for all their assistance and cooperation during this review. The organization and professionalism shown by ILP and the KANA organization is greatly appreciated.
The final draft of this report will be sent to Northern Community Resources for review. You will receive the final report within approximately thirty days, including a Plan of Action form, listing the Areas Requiring Response. You will then have an additional thirty days to complete the Plan of Action. The directions on how to proceed from there will be included in a cover letter you will receive with the final report and Plan of Action form.
Once NCR has reviewed the completed Plan of Action, it will be sent to the DMHDD Quality Assurance Section. The QA Section will then contact you to develop collaboratively a plan for change.
Attachments: Administrative and Personnel Checklist, Interview Form for Staff of Related Agencies (tallied), Score sheet (tallied)
NCR 8/00