Yesterday morning I was enjoying a cup of coffee and reading the paper when I stumbled across an article that was both frightening and eye-opening. The article discussed different situations caseworkers in Michigan were facing when confronted by their angry clients. Caseworkers reported that clients were making violent threats, by-passing security guards and showing up at their desks unannounced/uninvited, and in one event a piece of concrete was hurled through the window of a welfare agency. Remember, these are caseworkers…the people that are trying to help the very people acting out in frustration.

If the events these caseworkers are facing on a regular basis weren’t enough to make me shake my head in disbelief, the proposed solution definitely did. According to the paper, seven caseworkers went to the state Capitol to ask for help – better security, more staff, and help with the problem computer system. One of the ‘helpful’ lawmakers suggested they consider carrying handguns. Yes, you just read that right…I had to re-read the paragraph twice to comprehend this recommendation. Handguns? What is this…the Wild West? Caseworkers provide help; they do not enforce law or act as body guards! Needless to say, this suggestion did not sit well with the caseworkers. I’m sure there were better suggestions offered up from lawmakers, but the newspaper did not mention them.

Read the rest of this entry »

How many of us are up to date on the Health Care Reform Bill, or can talk with confidence about the newest developments in the war in Iraq? Probably most of us. Both of these topics have full-time news coverage and representatives speaking out to make the ideas and beliefs of these subjects known. Unfortunately, there is a very important group who is going unheard. A group that is unable to help themselves or speak out for themselves. This group is the children who are being shuffled through Child Protective Service Agencies. The agencies that are supposed to protect these children have been making mistakes, placing children back into dangerous situations, forgetting children because of lack of continuity in case processes, and some needed cries for help have just been going unanswered. The problem isn’t the caseworkers; the problem is the unattainable workload. Finally, the caseworkers have had enough and caseworkers are making their situation known; giving a voice to the children who have been wronged by the mismanaged system and informing the public on problems that have, until now, been kept quiet.

Read the rest of this entry »

At a recent neighborhood get together, I was asked the typical question, “What do you do for a living?” For once, I paused before spitting out my typical “I’m in software” answer. I did not respond with a summary of the tasks I perform, but instead with the impact that work has. I responded, with total conviction, “I ensure people get fed and have beds to sleep in.” Instead of glazed over indifference, I got an engaged reply, “tell me more”. So, I did.
There is a county government agency in the East providing aid to families. They have an ongoing caseload of over 48,000 cases, which must be maintained and reviewed multiple times per year. In addition, the agency receives new applications for assistance daily. Needy individuals and families desperately need prompt service delivery. But they can’t get what the need. Committed Social Service workers desperately want to deliver service. But they can’t do what they want. They have a complex problem

Read the rest of this entry »

The other day a colleague shared this story in Newsday discussing the shortage of social services case workers and increasing demands for assistance; it reminded me how little has changed since I was a social services case worker in the late 80′s. My job was to process applications for beneifts under the AFDC program, a federal program designed to provide cash and medical assistance to children when a parent is missing from the home. The challenge was to provide assistance to people who qualified while ensuring the integrity of the program by preventing fraud and complying with the regulations defined in the program charter.

Regulations provided 30 days to either approve or deny the case – but when there is only one parent, no child support, no income and the landlord is about to evict — 30 days might as well be an eternity. Every day we dealt with people whose well-being rested in the balance – based on whether or not we made a good decision. Decide wrong and a child goes without food or medical care. Decide wrong and someone who doesn’t meet the program criteria, or intentionally commits fraud, may receive benefits that can never be recovered. These overpayments deplete the assistance pool for qualified recipients, can result in expensive legal fees for prosecution, and always lead to higher costs for the taxpayers to fund. In social work, bad decisions are often catastrophic.

To further complicate an already complex process, people had found all sorts of inventive ways to cheat the system. So much time had to be devoted to mitigating potential fraud that it often did take 30 days just to check social security, see if the applicant was receiving benefits anywhere else, check IRS, DMV and child support records and so on.

While that program no longer exists, many others do — with similar levels of need, time sensitivity and complexity. Today, we have the benefit of tremendous technology; yet many states and counties still suffer from outdated systems and manual processes that prevent them from making good decisions in a timely fashion. It’s not that they enjoy inefficiency; it’s often that budgets and regulations provide for the services for constituents but not a good technical mechanism for delivering them. Many agencies are either faced with cobbling together a solution, relying on manual processes or developing a custom system – all are unworkable from the perspective of accuracy, immediacy or cost.

Meanwhile, the weak economy puts increasing pressure on programs as more people have need. Many programs find themselves lacking sufficient staff to meet growing demand.

This is why it’s so critical for social services to have access to technology that is cost-effective and easy to implement, operate and maintain. These organizations aren’t swimming in IT resources and don’t have the luxury to replace systems they use every day – many of which may be provided by other agencies and outside their control. Overlay technologies, like Prodagio Case Management, are the only viable option as they provide the benefit of keeping essential data correlated in one place and full audit capabilities so essential for transparency and compliance. When regulations change, as they frequently do, these systems can be quickly updated for the new rules. These technologies help agencies balance the needs of constituents with the fiduciary responsibility to make good decisions; and that enables the best outcomes for everyone involved.

Reminders and Obligations are task items that are frequently used in both Prodagio Contracts and Prodagio Case Management. Even though both Reminders and Obligations send emails and both can be viewed as items in the My Tasks View, Reminders and Obligations each serve a different functional purpose.

A Reminder is an informal notice that requires no contractual or legal action, where an Obligation on the other hand is a notice that does require some kind of contractual or legal action.

The following list compares the functional similarities and differences between Reminders and Obligations.

Reminders
• Include Automated Reminders (set up by a BA).
• Priority can not be set.
• Due Date is not required.
• Can not be part of a series.
• Notification date specifies when an email notification will be sent.
• Can be set to recur weekly, bi-weekly, semi-monthly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, or annually.
• Predefined action can be selected from a drop-down selection list.
• Special instructions can be added.
• Comments can be added only when closing a reminder.
• Esignature is not required to close.
• Status categories include Scheduled, Open, and Completed.
• E-mail sent to each recipient or group with action named in the subject line.
• Can be added to Outlook Calendar.
• Instructions, Comments, and Task and Dashboard link included in e-mail.

Obligations
• Include both Financial and Non-Financial Obligations.
• Priority of high is automatically set.
• Due Date is required.
• Can be part of a series.
• Notification date specifies when an email notification will be sent.
• Can be set to recur weekly, bi-weekly, semi-monthly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, or annually.
• Predefined action not available.
• Special instructions can be added.
• Comments can be added when creating a new obligation.
• Esignature is required to close.
• Status categories include Scheduled, Open, Completed, and Deleted.
• E-mail sent to each recipient or group.
• Can be added to Outlook Calendar.
• Instructions, Comments, and Task and Dashboard link included in e-mail.