Categories
Education Theories

I need you to write a constructive critique (feedback) on it.

I turned in an assignment last week. I need you to write a constructive critique (feedback) on it. Then I need the second page to be a summary of what we talked about, how I felt, and how i would make the necessary changes.
Instructions are below.

Categories
Education Theories

How would you describe jorge’s leadership style in this situation?

CASE: Implementing a New Model for Education
A TALE OF TWO TEAMS
From: Leadership Case Studies in Education (Peter G. Northouse; Marie Lee)
Living in the age of educational accountability, Jorge Hernández, principal of a regional public high school, is feeling the pressure from his district’s superintendent to improve student performance on state assessments. Due to the large student and staff population at his high school, Jorge knows he cannot successfully mine all the student achievement data and develop approaches to address deficient areas by himself. Last year, he took a hands-off approach and charged the English and math department heads with data analysis and distribution of data to the teachers, an assignment that each department head approached differently.
The English department chair, Tamika Jones, assembled her department members two times a month, providing the teachers with the initial data and asking them to organize the data in a manner that made sense to them. Tamika then charged the teachers to collect additional formative assessment data to monitor student progress. Based on the data, teachers modified curriculum and instructional practices to target standards not being achieved by students. Because of what they were seeing, the teachers requested a language arts lab be established to help students who scored below proficient, and Tamika found the resources to create the lab. She also allowed the teachers to control the data, make changes, and own the solutions to improve the current status of student performance. She provided various supports when necessary, such as minor schedule or room changes and release time, and made a point to celebrate staff and student success.

Lewis Milton, the math department chair, took a different approach. Lewis reviewed the initial data, wrote reports that identified areas of concern, and then distributed his reports to the math teachers in an initial meeting. He instructed the teachers to use the data reports to change their instruction to improve student performance in the indicated areas of concern. Lewis told the teachers that he would make classroom visits and be available during planning time to assist with strategies and resources. Midway through the year, he held one additional meeting with the teachers to discuss the data. Minutes from teachers’ meetings held during the year revealed that some of the math department teachers were frustrated and had not received the attention they requested from Lewis, while others reported they were experiencing good progress and liked having autonomy to address student performance on their own.
As Jorge reviews the most recent state assessment scores, he notes there has been a significant growth in language arts, while math scores have remained stagnant. As a new school year approaches, Jorge realizes that he must make changes in the approaches taken to bring up the assessment scores. He plans to have individual meetings with each department chair and then meet with them together to develop an action plan for the new school year.
Questions
1. How would you describe the leadership styles of Tamika Jones and Lewis Milton? How do they differ in terms of directiveness and supportiveness?
2. How would you describe Jorge’s leadership style in this situation?
3. If you were Jorge, how would you approach the separate meetings you plan to have with Tamika and Lewis? How would you approach the meeting with both of them together?

Categories
Education Theories

Consider one particular public service and identify the key challenges for leaders in that specific context.

Human Service Organizations: Challenges and Solutions
It is perhaps unsurprising in an era of individualization, privatization, marketization, and completion (Berg et al. 2012), that in the human sector and in human service organizations, leadership is often assumed to be a set of activities or roles residing in individuals, echoing the image of the heroic leader. The particular challenges of human services, though – especially its complexity, ambiguity, diverse stakeholders and dependence on inter-organizational collaboration in delivering services – will always raise questions about the transferability of management and leadership practices from the commercial sector.
The increasing recognition of leadership of and within human services professions (i.e., non-managerial leadership), the increasing interest in distributed forms of leadership more generally, and the development of particular human sector approaches indicate that our understanding of human service leadership and its practice continues to develop, as does its distinctiveness. As noted at the outset, contextual appreciation is important in all consideration of leadership, not least in the human sector. The indications are that collective or distributed approaches to leadership are particularly suited to and appropriate for the human sector and that such approaches are likely to gain more attention from both academics and practitioners. Indeed, Berg et al. argue that, in the context of human service: ‘If we see organizational work and social change as potentially a bottom-up process, leadership might be more widely distributed than the theories of distributed leadership imagine’ (2012: 404).
The challenge for human service managers is to promote effective relationships with professional workers with significant levels of expert knowledge, allowing sufficient individual autonomy within the remit of their organizational roles. The indications over recent years are that the focus of managers in this context has been of control and compliance rather than development and commitment. Maintaining self-determination and promoting self-esteem and continuing to provide channels for dissent are key factors for a human service sector under severe pressure. Despite issues of ownership, the needs of citizens will always call for appropriate services. For human services to continue to offer high-quality services in restricted circumstances, the challenge for leadership is significant.
Source: Berg, E., Barry, J. and Chandler, J. (2012) Changing leadership and gender in public sector organizations. British Journal of Management, 23(3): 402–414.
QUESTION(S)
1. In what ways are human service organizations similar to and different from their counterparts in the commercial world? What are implications of this for the practice of human service leadership and for the development of future leaders?
2. What are the relative responsibilities of individual human service professionals and their leaders? How can tensions between these parties be managed?
3. Consider one particular public service and identify the key challenges for leaders in that specific context. How can future leaders be prepared to deal with those challenges?

Categories
Education Theories

Provide a full description of the model (include citations).

CASE: Meeting the Health and Service Needs of LGBTQ Youth in Detroit
Meeting the Health and Social Service Needs of High-Risk LGBTQ Youth in Detroit: The Ruth Ellis Health & Wellness Center
In Detroit, Michigan, a unique partnership between the Ruth Ellis Center (REC), a youth social services agency, and the Henry Ford Health System (HFHS), a non-profit, integrated health care organization, is seeking to meet the health and social service needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth experiencing systemic barriers to housing, health, and wellness. The Ruth Ellis Health & Wellness Center was established in 2016 to provide a range of physical health, behavioral health, and social services tailored to the diverse needs of this population in a safe, convenient environment. Initially operating in a mobile clinic, the program moved into a newly constructed health and wellness center (the “Center”) at the REC in February 2017.

Partnership Overview
PROBLEM: As a Medicaid-contracted mental health and social services provider, REC was serving approximately 900 LGBTQ youth annually with services aimed at reducing barriers to self-sufficiency, including: (1) short- and long-term residential housing; (2) a drop-in center offering food, clothing, showers, laundry, and case management; (3) outpatient mental health and substance use disorder services; and (4) state-licensed foster care residential services. REC’s drop-in center, however, afforded no privacy to address the population’s elevated risks for issues such as depression and anxiety; violence from family and society; suicide; poverty; unemployment; homelessness; and diagnoses of HIV or AIDS.2 Further, youth served by REC were frustrated by their struggles in accessing health care — they had trouble obtaining prescriptions for gender-transitioning medication, faced discrimination or denial of services from providers, and often had to go to emergency departments as a last resort for care.
INTENDED SOLUTION: With 5,000 square feet of space available for renovation, REC approached HFHS to explore a partnership to integrate primary and behavioral health care in a community setting and meet both the health and social service needs of the LGBTQ youth population. HFHS had the primary care model and clinical expertise to serve LGBTQ youth, but lacked a channel and the cultural competency to reach this population. It knew that the youth did not trust the medical system enough to come to its site.
Together, the organizations determined that a fully integrated, community-based setting would be the best option for safely delivering the full range of health and social services needed by the population. Service Delivery Model Once the partnership was established, HFHS assumed a key role in providing in-kind guidance to REC on renovating the care facility, which was once a vaudeville theater. Directors of HFHS’ facility development department and its community-based health program met with REC regularly to provide guidance on the renovation. HFHS also agreed to set up and maintain the electronic medical record (EMR) system at no cost. REC, in turn, ensured that the new space was designed to meet the needs of LGBTQ youth and raised the capital for construction. During construction, HFHS brought its mobile clinic, at its own expense, to REC and began to see patients. The partnership’s integrated model of care delivers medical, behavioral health, and social services all in the newly built Center.
HFHS provides general primary care and services targeted to the population’s health needs and risks. These include prevention of HIV/AIDS for those at high risk, sexual health services, and transition medications and hormone therapy for transgender individuals. Clinical care is provided by HFHS physician Maureen Connolly, MD, who works at the Center two days a week and worked extensively with LGBTQ youth during her residency. The REC team complements physical health services with behavioral health and social services. These include, for example, counseling for depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance use disorders, as well as social service needs related to housing stability, intimate partner violence, food security, and vocational training and employment. REC employs a front-desk receptionist and a customer service representative, who schedule appointments, manage insurance eligibility, and provide linkages to primary health, behavioral health, and social services within the Center.

The program’s care model is bi-directional, with primary care providers identifying behavioral health and social service needs in patients, and behavioral health providers making referrals to primary care and social services. Information Sharing and Reporting Early, ongoing, and outcomes-focused communication among the partners has contributed to initial program successes. The partnership uses a case conferencing model that involves weekly team meetings to discuss patient health and social service needs, supplemented by calls and e-mails to address time[1]sensitive concerns. The team also relies on EMRs, accessed through six computer workstations that REC purchased, to share patient notes and facilitate billing. REC staff underwent Community Connect HIPAA Compliance and Protected Health Information Training, and leadership signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to align with HIPAA requirements. Shared Governance The partnership is governed jointly by REC and HFHS. The partners developed a four-page MOU that describes the responsibilities and expectations of each organization, including: proposed services; compliance with guidelines (e.g., current standards of practice for care, HIPAA compliance); clinical staffing; space and equipment; billing and fee collection; and training. Representatives meet quarterly to discuss policies, procedures, and how the partnership is working. These representatives review demographic data of the served population, as well as targeted outcomes, including number of unduplicated users, number of visits, and visit types. This shared approach to governance ensures that each partner’s needs are reflected in the program, and that input and buy-in are maintained.
Funding Model
The partnership’s braided funding model includes resources from: the partners, the Michigan Health Endowment Fund, The Jewish Fund, Community Foundation of Southeast Michigan, DMC Foundation, Carls Foundation, private donors, and Medicaid reimbursement. The majority (60 percent) of expenses are supported by foundation funds. REC is solely responsible for maintaining the Center space, with costs covered by a combination of foundation funds and unrestricted operating income from a capital campaign. Costs for equipment and supplies are shared depending on funds available and which organization has ready access to in-kind contributions.
HFHS pays for costs related to EMR access, as well as the salaries of the physician, nurse practitioner, and medical assistant, and their malpractice insurance. The Michigan Health Endowment Fund supports the salary of the Center’s front[1]desk staff. Medicaid, through contracted managed care organizations, reimburses health care services provided by HFHS and behavioral health services provided by REC. Patient and Community Engagement The patient community played a key role in identifying unmet needs that the Center now addresses, including suggestions for design of the new Center. For example, REC youth identified the need for a shower in an on-site restroom, noting that some individuals would not go to the doctor because they had not been able to shower. Program leaders recognized from the start that typical outreach campaigns (e.g., television spots, flyers) would not be effective, given the marginalization of the target population. Instead, the co-location of the facility with REC’s drop-in center, a convenient setting for youth in the area, facilitates outreach. Word of mouth, social media, and peer outreach staff helps to build awareness for the Center’s services. Dr. Connolly also regularly speaks with other community providers to encourage referrals.
Evaluation and Outcomes
Program evaluation is still in its early phases. Shared process metrics tracked to-date include the number of patients served, number of visits completed, and the types of services delivered. Following each patient visit, staff administer a three-question survey to secure feedback about the appointment process and provider relationship. Initial results have been very positive, as further evidenced by the rate of patient return visits. In addition, REC is assessing the effectiveness of the behavioral health and social services provided at the Center. The partnership is beginning to produce cost savings and operational efficiencies for the partners, though at this early stage, these outcomes are not yet quantified. REC, for example, has leveraged HFHS’ purchasing power to secure needed equipment for the Center, and has not had to devote resources to hiring, credentialing, and purchasing malpractice insurance for clinical staff. HFHS, in turn, uses the REC facility to serve patients without having to pay for rent or utilities. The project team ultimately plans to measure the program’s return-on-investment.
Success Factors
The staff at REC and HFHS attribute a number of factors to the collaboration’s success, including: n Well-matched values and goals. Both organizations are committed to serving young people, improving people’s lives through health and wellness, and addressing social determinants of health. n A thoughtful and measured ramp-up period. The organizations spent two years building the partnership model before providing services together. The investment in ensuring mutual understanding around core values helped prevent unproductive turf issues. n Relevant experience and complementary expertise. REC leadership and staff offered robust experience developing community collaboratives, as well as expertise in the needs of LGBTQ youth, strong relationships with those in the community, and effective outreach channels.
This was complemented by HFHS’ clinical and logistical care expertise. n Balanced collaboration. Across the planning and implementation of the program, balanced collaboration — through financing, contributed expertise, donated in-kind services, care delivery, and structured, ongoing communication — has created a model of care delivery that best meets the unique needs of this vulnerable population. The open relationship also creates a level of trust that makes the partnership sustainable.
Write Your Response to the Discussion Topic
Consider writing your post in a Word Processing application and then copy/paste your assignment when you are ready. This allows you to take your time to think about the assignment, proofread your work, and edit it before submitting. It also helps ensure you don’t lose your work due to connectivity or other issues.
QUESTION(S)
Challenges
While the partnership has been successful in its early stages, project staff identified a few programmatic challenges, including:
1. Having adequate capacity to meet the very high demand for primary care services in particular, since Dr. Connolly is only on-site two days a week.
2. Developing a peer navigator model, given issues of confidentiality that may arise if peers have access to patient health information and use it inappropriately. This concern has prevented the program from engaging peers in coordinating care linkages.
3. Complying with the time-consuming data entry requirements of the program’s many grant funders.

Please respond to the questions below:
Peruse the internet or library databases and identify a model that would address the current challenges at the Ruth Ellis Health and Wellness Center. Example: Partnership with a FPO, etc.1
Provide a full description of the model (include citations).
Explain how this model (partnership) could address the challenges listed above? Provide an example of an organization currently benefiting from the model cited in your recommendation. Include website if available. Example: BAYCAT; Non-Profit Social Enterprise, baycat.orgLinks to an external site.
1Nonprofit/NFPO
Non-Profit Social Enterprise
For Profit (FPO)
Non-governmental organization (NGO)
Public Sector/Government Organizations or Agencies
Private Sector e.g., private mental health practice, etc.
Community Based Organization (CBO)
Community Development Corporation (CDC)
Note: Not-for-profit organization (NFPO) is one that does not earn profit for its owners. All money earned through pursuing business activities or through donations goes right back into running the organization. A nonprofit organization (NPO) is one that qualifies for tax-exempt status by the IRS because its mission and purpose are to further a social cause and provide a public benefit. Nonprofit organizations include hospitals, universities, national charities and foundations. A for-profit organization is one that operates with the goal of making money.

Categories
Education Theories

Write a synthesis of what you have found, supporting what you say with citations from the various articles.

Purpose: The goal in this assignment is to write a literature review paper on your topic from assignment one. This assignment will also help you further refine the research problem used in assignment one. It is important to note that the purpose of this assignment is to review the current literature on a selected topic. You are expected to describe the major trends in a selected area, elaborate on several important solutions to past challenges, and identify the major challenges to be addressed in the future.
When describing the challenges that researchers and practitioners will face, you need to critically analyze the current theories, processes, and methodologies, and identify promising directions that future research could take. The review of the literature on your topic will help you prepare for assignment four.
Directions:
Organize the literature that you reviewed in your annotated bibliography (i.e., a minimum of seven primary, peer-reviewed research articles that are no more than six years old) and any additional primary, peer-reviewed research articles related to your topic. Look at how the information in the articles elaborate on several important solutions to past challenges, and identify the major challenges to be addressed in the future.
Write a synthesis of what you have found, supporting what you say with citations from the various articles. For each approach: discuss the problem(s) it addresses, methods used, theoretical foundation, the results of this approach, and any unresolved issues and study limitations. Compose an introduction to the synthesis that links your topic to the literature
Write strong clear paragraphs with transitions between ideas
Use a logical flow within paragraphs and between them
State the connections between the synthesized research and your topic
Cite and reference all sources. If you use the author’s exact words, use quotation marks, cite, and include the page number. If you are using the author’s ideas, cite the author(s) and date. No more than 20% of your paper can be material that is directly quoted from the literature. Failure to cite will result in a failing grade—plagiarism is not tolerated.
Every article you use must appear in the reference section. A paper cannot appear in the reference section if it is not explicitly cited in the main body of the paper.

Categories
Education Theories

Your report should clearly identify an issue, a problem, and propose a potential solution(s) based on other organizational trends.

The trend analysis requires you to further investigate a topic and organizational problem identified in assignment one. You will examine the alternative solutions, and propose the most effective solution using supporting evidence. The trend analysis is based on a specific topic and the problem(s) that surround it from the previous assignments.
The trend analysis should include background information on the specific topic, highlight existing problems or effective strategies, as well as recommendations. The trend analysis can focus on an organization or entire industry, a specific project or program, or a person (RELATED TO YOUR TOPIC).
**You will use the same topic/problem from Trend Analysis assignment one: Part A. Your report should clearly identify an issue, a problem, and propose a potential solution(s) based on other organizational trends. You may incorporate all parts of Trend Analysis (Part A) and selected information/sources from the Literature Synthesis assignment. Create a title page using the format provided in the syllabus Appendix A. Be sure to re-introduce your topic and discuss how the problem impacts the current field of education/human services, and provide a recommendation or propose an intervention based on organizational trends in the field. (The Trend Analysis should be brief (concise).

Categories
Education Theories

How can tensions between these parties be managed?

Human Service Organizations: Challenges and Solutions
It is perhaps unsurprising in an era of individualization, privatization, marketization, and completion (Berg et al. 2012), that in the human sector and in human service organizations, leadership is often assumed to be a set of activities or roles residing in individuals, echoing the image of the heroic leader. The particular challenges of human services, though – especially its complexity, ambiguity, diverse stakeholders and dependence on inter-organizational collaboration in delivering services – will always raise questions about the transferability of management and leadership practices from the commercial sector.
The increasing recognition of leadership of and within human services professions (i.e., non-managerial leadership), the increasing interest in distributed forms of leadership more generally, and the development of particular human sector approaches indicate that our understanding of human service leadership and its practice continues to develop, as does its distinctiveness. As noted at the outset, contextual appreciation is important in all consideration of leadership, not least in the human sector. The indications are that collective or distributed approaches to leadership are particularly suited to and appropriate for the human sector and that such approaches are likely to gain more attention from both academics and practitioners. Indeed, Berg et al. argue that, in the context of human service: ‘If we see organizational work and social change as potentially a bottom-up process, leadership might be more widely distributed than the theories of distributed leadership imagine’ (2012: 404).
The challenge for human service managers is to promote effective relationships with professional workers with significant levels of expert knowledge, allowing sufficient individual autonomy within the remit of their organizational roles. The indications over recent years are that the focus of managers in this context has been of control and compliance rather than development and commitment. Maintaining self-determination and promoting self-esteem and continuing to provide channels for dissent are key factors for a human service sector under severe pressure. Despite issues of ownership, the needs of citizens will always call for appropriate services. For human services to continue to offer high-quality services in restricted circumstances, the challenge for leadership is significant.
Source: Berg, E., Barry, J. and Chandler, J. (2012) Changing leadership and gender in public sector organizations. British Journal of Management, 23(3): 402–414.
QUESTION(S)
1. In what ways are human service organizations similar to and different from their counterparts in the commercial world? What are implications of this for the practice of human service leadership and for the development of future leaders?
2. What are the relative responsibilities of individual human service professionals and their leaders? How can tensions between these parties be managed?
3. Consider one particular public service and identify the key challenges for leaders in that specific context. How can future leaders be prepared to deal with those challenges?

Categories
Education Theories

How would you describe jorge’s leadership style in this situation?

CASE: Implementing a New Model for Education
A TALE OF TWO TEAMS
From: Leadership Case Studies in Education (Peter G. Northouse; Marie Lee)
Living in the age of educational accountability, Jorge Hernández, principal of a regional public high school, is feeling the pressure from his district’s superintendent to improve student performance on state assessments. Due to the large student and staff population at his high school, Jorge knows he cannot successfully mine all the student achievement data and develop approaches to address deficient areas by himself. Last year, he took a hands-off approach and charged the English and math department heads with data analysis and distribution of data to the teachers, an assignment that each department head approached differently.
The English department chair, Tamika Jones, assembled her department members two times a month, providing the teachers with the initial data and asking them to organize the data in a manner that made sense to them. Tamika then charged the teachers to collect additional formative assessment data to monitor student progress. Based on the data, teachers modified curriculum and instructional practices to target standards not being achieved by students. Because of what they were seeing, the teachers requested a language arts lab be established to help students who scored below proficient, and Tamika found the resources to create the lab. She also allowed the teachers to control the data, make changes, and own the solutions to improve the current status of student performance. She provided various supports when necessary, such as minor schedule or room changes and release time, and made a point to celebrate staff and student success.

Lewis Milton, the math department chair, took a different approach. Lewis reviewed the initial data, wrote reports that identified areas of concern, and then distributed his reports to the math teachers in an initial meeting. He instructed the teachers to use the data reports to change their instruction to improve student performance in the indicated areas of concern. Lewis told the teachers that he would make classroom visits and be available during planning time to assist with strategies and resources. Midway through the year, he held one additional meeting with the teachers to discuss the data. Minutes from teachers’ meetings held during the year revealed that some of the math department teachers were frustrated and had not received the attention they requested from Lewis, while others reported they were experiencing good progress and liked having autonomy to address student performance on their own.
As Jorge reviews the most recent state assessment scores, he notes there has been a significant growth in language arts, while math scores have remained stagnant. As a new school year approaches, Jorge realizes that he must make changes in the approaches taken to bring up the assessment scores. He plans to have individual meetings with each department chair and then meet with them together to develop an action plan for the new school year.
Questions
1. How would you describe the leadership styles of Tamika Jones and Lewis Milton? How do they differ in terms of directiveness and supportiveness?
2. How would you describe Jorge’s leadership style in this situation?
3. If you were Jorge, how would you approach the separate meetings you plan to have with Tamika and Lewis? How would you approach the meeting with both of them together?

Categories
Education Theories

Write your response to the discussion topic

CASE: Meeting the Health and Service Needs of LGBTQ Youth in Detroit
Meeting the Health and Social Service Needs of High-Risk LGBTQ Youth in Detroit: The Ruth Ellis Health & Wellness Center
In Detroit, Michigan, a unique partnership between the Ruth Ellis Center (REC), a youth social services agency, and the Henry Ford Health System (HFHS), a non-profit, integrated health care organization, is seeking to meet the health and social service needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth experiencing systemic barriers to housing, health, and wellness. The Ruth Ellis Health & Wellness Center was established in 2016 to provide a range of physical health, behavioral health, and social services tailored to the diverse needs of this population in a safe, convenient environment. Initially operating in a mobile clinic, the program moved into a newly constructed health and wellness center (the “Center”) at the REC in February 2017.

Partnership Overview
PROBLEM: As a Medicaid-contracted mental health and social services provider, REC was serving approximately 900 LGBTQ youth annually with services aimed at reducing barriers to self-sufficiency, including: (1) short- and long-term residential housing; (2) a drop-in center offering food, clothing, showers, laundry, and case management; (3) outpatient mental health and substance use disorder services; and (4) state-licensed foster care residential services. REC’s drop-in center, however, afforded no privacy to address the population’s elevated risks for issues such as depression and anxiety; violence from family and society; suicide; poverty; unemployment; homelessness; and diagnoses of HIV or AIDS.2 Further, youth served by REC were frustrated by their struggles in accessing health care — they had trouble obtaining prescriptions for gender-transitioning medication, faced discrimination or denial of services from providers, and often had to go to emergency departments as a last resort for care.
INTENDED SOLUTION: With 5,000 square feet of space available for renovation, REC approached HFHS to explore a partnership to integrate primary and behavioral health care in a community setting and meet both the health and social service needs of the LGBTQ youth population. HFHS had the primary care model and clinical expertise to serve LGBTQ youth, but lacked a channel and the cultural competency to reach this population. It knew that the youth did not trust the medical system enough to come to its site.
Together, the organizations determined that a fully integrated, community-based setting would be the best option for safely delivering the full range of health and social services needed by the population. Service Delivery Model Once the partnership was established, HFHS assumed a key role in providing in-kind guidance to REC on renovating the care facility, which was once a vaudeville theater. Directors of HFHS’ facility development department and its community-based health program met with REC regularly to provide guidance on the renovation. HFHS also agreed to set up and maintain the electronic medical record (EMR) system at no cost. REC, in turn, ensured that the new space was designed to meet the needs of LGBTQ youth and raised the capital for construction. During construction, HFHS brought its mobile clinic, at its own expense, to REC and began to see patients. The partnership’s integrated model of care delivers medical, behavioral health, and social services all in the newly built Center.
HFHS provides general primary care and services targeted to the population’s health needs and risks. These include prevention of HIV/AIDS for those at high risk, sexual health services, and transition medications and hormone therapy for transgender individuals. Clinical care is provided by HFHS physician Maureen Connolly, MD, who works at the Center two days a week and worked extensively with LGBTQ youth during her residency. The REC team complements physical health services with behavioral health and social services. These include, for example, counseling for depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance use disorders, as well as social service needs related to housing stability, intimate partner violence, food security, and vocational training and employment. REC employs a front-desk receptionist and a customer service representative, who schedule appointments, manage insurance eligibility, and provide linkages to primary health, behavioral health, and social services within the Center.

The program’s care model is bi-directional, with primary care providers identifying behavioral health and social service needs in patients, and behavioral health providers making referrals to primary care and social services. Information Sharing and Reporting Early, ongoing, and outcomes-focused communication among the partners has contributed to initial program successes. The partnership uses a case conferencing model that involves weekly team meetings to discuss patient health and social service needs, supplemented by calls and e-mails to address time[1]sensitive concerns. The team also relies on EMRs, accessed through six computer workstations that REC purchased, to share patient notes and facilitate billing. REC staff underwent Community Connect HIPAA Compliance and Protected Health Information Training, and leadership signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to align with HIPAA requirements. Shared Governance The partnership is governed jointly by REC and HFHS. The partners developed a four-page MOU that describes the responsibilities and expectations of each organization, including: proposed services; compliance with guidelines (e.g., current standards of practice for care, HIPAA compliance); clinical staffing; space and equipment; billing and fee collection; and training. Representatives meet quarterly to discuss policies, procedures, and how the partnership is working. These representatives review demographic data of the served population, as well as targeted outcomes, including number of unduplicated users, number of visits, and visit types. This shared approach to governance ensures that each partner’s needs are reflected in the program, and that input and buy-in are maintained.
Funding Model
The partnership’s braided funding model includes resources from: the partners, the Michigan Health Endowment Fund, The Jewish Fund, Community Foundation of Southeast Michigan, DMC Foundation, Carls Foundation, private donors, and Medicaid reimbursement. The majority (60 percent) of expenses are supported by foundation funds. REC is solely responsible for maintaining the Center space, with costs covered by a combination of foundation funds and unrestricted operating income from a capital campaign. Costs for equipment and supplies are shared depending on funds available and which organization has ready access to in-kind contributions.
HFHS pays for costs related to EMR access, as well as the salaries of the physician, nurse practitioner, and medical assistant, and their malpractice insurance. The Michigan Health Endowment Fund supports the salary of the Center’s front[1]desk staff. Medicaid, through contracted managed care organizations, reimburses health care services provided by HFHS and behavioral health services provided by REC. Patient and Community Engagement The patient community played a key role in identifying unmet needs that the Center now addresses, including suggestions for design of the new Center. For example, REC youth identified the need for a shower in an on-site restroom, noting that some individuals would not go to the doctor because they had not been able to shower. Program leaders recognized from the start that typical outreach campaigns (e.g., television spots, flyers) would not be effective, given the marginalization of the target population. Instead, the co-location of the facility with REC’s drop-in center, a convenient setting for youth in the area, facilitates outreach. Word of mouth, social media, and peer outreach staff helps to build awareness for the Center’s services. Dr. Connolly also regularly speaks with other community providers to encourage referrals.
Evaluation and Outcomes
Program evaluation is still in its early phases. Shared process metrics tracked to-date include the number of patients served, number of visits completed, and the types of services delivered. Following each patient visit, staff administer a three-question survey to secure feedback about the appointment process and provider relationship. Initial results have been very positive, as further evidenced by the rate of patient return visits. In addition, REC is assessing the effectiveness of the behavioral health and social services provided at the Center. The partnership is beginning to produce cost savings and operational efficiencies for the partners, though at this early stage, these outcomes are not yet quantified. REC, for example, has leveraged HFHS’ purchasing power to secure needed equipment for the Center, and has not had to devote resources to hiring, credentialing, and purchasing malpractice insurance for clinical staff. HFHS, in turn, uses the REC facility to serve patients without having to pay for rent or utilities. The project team ultimately plans to measure the program’s return-on-investment.
Success Factors
The staff at REC and HFHS attribute a number of factors to the collaboration’s success, including: n Well-matched values and goals. Both organizations are committed to serving young people, improving people’s lives through health and wellness, and addressing social determinants of health. n A thoughtful and measured ramp-up period. The organizations spent two years building the partnership model before providing services together. The investment in ensuring mutual understanding around core values helped prevent unproductive turf issues. n Relevant experience and complementary expertise. REC leadership and staff offered robust experience developing community collaboratives, as well as expertise in the needs of LGBTQ youth, strong relationships with those in the community, and effective outreach channels.
This was complemented by HFHS’ clinical and logistical care expertise. n Balanced collaboration. Across the planning and implementation of the program, balanced collaboration — through financing, contributed expertise, donated in-kind services, care delivery, and structured, ongoing communication — has created a model of care delivery that best meets the unique needs of this vulnerable population. The open relationship also creates a level of trust that makes the partnership sustainable.
Write Your Response to the Discussion Topic
Consider writing your post in a Word Processing application and then copy/paste your assignment when you are ready. This allows you to take your time to think about the assignment, proofread your work, and edit it before submitting. It also helps ensure you don’t lose your work due to connectivity or other issues.
QUESTION(S)
Challenges
While the partnership has been successful in its early stages, project staff identified a few programmatic challenges, including:
1. Having adequate capacity to meet the very high demand for primary care services in particular, since Dr. Connolly is only on-site two days a week.
2. Developing a peer navigator model, given issues of confidentiality that may arise if peers have access to patient health information and use it inappropriately. This concern has prevented the program from engaging peers in coordinating care linkages.
3. Complying with the time-consuming data entry requirements of the program’s many grant funders.

Please respond to the questions below:
Peruse the internet or library databases and identify a model that would address the current challenges at the Ruth Ellis Health and Wellness Center. Example: Partnership with a FPO, etc.1
Provide a full description of the model (include citations).
Explain how this model (partnership) could address the challenges listed above? Provide an example of an organization currently benefiting from the model cited in your recommendation. Include website if available. Example: BAYCAT; Non-Profit Social Enterprise, baycat.orgLinks to an external site.
1Nonprofit/NFPO
Non-Profit Social Enterprise
For Profit (FPO)
Non-governmental organization (NGO)
Public Sector/Government Organizations or Agencies
Private Sector e.g., private mental health practice, etc.
Community Based Organization (CBO)
Community Development Corporation (CDC)
Note: Not-for-profit organization (NFPO) is one that does not earn profit for its owners. All money earned through pursuing business activities or through donations goes right back into running the organization. A nonprofit organization (NPO) is one that qualifies for tax-exempt status by the IRS because its mission and purpose are to further a social cause and provide a public benefit. Nonprofit organizations include hospitals, universities, national charities and foundations. A for-profit organization is one that operates with the goal of making money.

Categories
Education Theories

How will your method aid in the students retaining information?

choose one of the learning theories discussed: McCarthy or Honey and Mumford. Describe the learning theory. Choose a lesson in your classroom. Describe how you would move your students through each phase of the learning process?. Be specific about what you are doing during each step. Describe how your actions will enhance student learning? How will you activate prior knowledge? How will your method aid in the students retaining information?