General statement: I agree with some previous comments about the clarification in these regulations regarding when ISP is referencing Parts I-V or just part V.
Definitions:
QDDP- the addition of the following statement is not consistent with what has been allowable, therefore, it could cause some that are in supervisory positions, to no longer qualify.
….if the person has five years of paid experience in providing direction, development, and implementation, direct supervision, and monitoring to the service provided. QDDPs are responsible for approving assessments and individual service plans or treatment plans to ensure appropriate services are provided to meet the needs of individuals receiving services. The QDDP shall have documented experience developing, conducting, and approving assessments and individual service plans or treatment plans.
12VAC35-109-70. Individualized services plan (ISP); Individualized supports plan; Service
planning.
supports, which is a component of the comprehensive individual support plan, 24
hours after admission.
This comment needs to be changed as we cannot submit this after 24 hours or there will be no payment. It is noted that we need submission of an ISP to WaMS 30 days in advance of the start date, so this statement does not make sense. In addition, the other regulations up for comment for Case Management notes the same, which has a large impact already on service providers being paid when case managers are given leeway in getting their documentation submitted timely as they are allowed to bill for services with other criteria, however, service providers cannot bill until the ISP is approved in WaMS causing us to lose payment when ISPs are not completed and pushed through for approval within WaMS prior to the start date of the ISP.
12VAC35-109-80. ISP Requirements
E. 2. After each training, providers shall test the employee’s or contractor’s knowledge,
competency, or both, and retain documentation of the test of the employee’s or
contractor’s knowledge, competency, or both within the employee or contractor’s
personnel file.
Please consider removing this requirement as this poses additional administrative burden and the DSP competency requirements already addresses having a working knowledge of the individuals for whom a DSP is working. In addition, the employee files should not contain information pertaining to an individual receiving services.
12VAC35-109-90. Reassessments and ISP reviews.
F. The provider shall complete quarterly reviews of the ISP in writing at least every three months from
the date of the implementation of the comprehensive ISP or whenever there is a reassessment. The review of the ISP shall be conducted in a person-centered manner, to determine if services are being delivered as described within the ISP. The individual receiving services and the authorized representative, if applicable, shall be included in the ISP review, to determine if the individual is satisfied with the services provided.
4. A review of the ISP shall note the:
a. Individual’s family involvement, if any, in the individual’s treatment;
It should not be the individual service provider’s responsibility to indicate family involvement in someone’s treatment. There is a review for satisfaction of service delivery that is reviewed quarterly when there is a Legal Guardian or Authorized Representative. Please provide clarification on this statement.