Increased number of clients attributed to better referral and linkages among providers.
Program:
More clients are being seen for the 28-day programs. Why are unit actuals so different from projections?
Fiscal:
No comment.
2
Fiscal:
This category is overspending at a variance of 0.74 percent.
Program:
The high rate of clients served is attributed to better referral and linkage between Part A-funded programs. Clients discontinued treatment services early, lowering total service units provided.
Program:
Will category run out of funds before the end of the year given its over-expenditure rate and increase in clients due to improved referral processes?
Fiscal:
This service category has a final variance of 6.82 percent. No provider requested additional funds to expand service capacity.
3
Fiscal:
This category only spent 93.18 percent of its allocation and is returning approximately $28,000.
Program:
The high rate of clients served can be attributed to better referral and linkage among Part A funded programs.
Program:
With higher client totals, why are expenditures not higher? Is this category FTE-driven?
*
This is the difference between the current expenditures and where the current expenditures should be at this point in the year based upon
the total allocation (plus carryover) and the assumption that expenditures are spread evenly over the year.
As of the last (2010) consumer survey
38 percent of the
105 respondents reporting a need for
Substance-abuse Treatment — Residential said they could not get it.
Clients survey year (FY 2009):
85
Est. percent of need met:
62%
Est. clients needing service:
137
Clients served (2009):
85
Est. clients not served (2009):
52
Cost per client (2009):
$2,832
Cost to meet need:
$147,264
Other Funding Streams
RW
Part A
EMA
$258,429
RW
Part A
EMA
Other Funding
Final Analysis
Unspent (including carryover/adjust.): $17,636
Performance Summary:
This category did not expend its allocation but did serve more clients than projected.
Compared to Last Year:
This category received a reduction in funding and in turn, did not serve as many clients as in previous years.
Unmet Need:
Questions:
With high client levels, does that signify a greater need that was met? With low expenditure levels, does that mean that fewer bed nights were needed and why?
Comments:
Client levels were higher than projected and in previous years, twice as many clients were seen as in FY 2009.
To report a problem with the mechanics of the web site, please click here.
All content-related comments should be referred directly to the planning council support office
at +1 (410) 662-7253.