Untitled Document Untitled Document

Minutes — Committee of the Whole Meeting, February 11, 2010

(As approved by the Committee May 6, 2010)


Call to Order

The Committee of the Whole of the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilities met on Thursday, February 11, 2010, in the Omni C Room of the Omni Southpark Hotel, 4140 Governor’s Row Austin, TX 78744. Council Vice-Chair Mary Durheim called the meeting to order at 10:03 AM.

I. Introduction

Committee members, staff and guests were introduced. Vice-Chair Durheim notified members that Council Chair Brenda Coleman-Beattie is emceeing the Central Texas African American Family Support Conference, which she has been involved with since its inception.

II. Review of Key Agenda Items

Project Development Committee Chair Susan Vardell and Public Policy Committee Chair Rick Tisch provided overviews of key discussion items planned for their respective committees.

Durheim provided a brief summary of the Executive Committee meeting. She reminded members that the Governor’s office is looking to appoint a new Council member for the position held previously by the late Rene Requenez and would like another self-advocate from the Rio Grande Valley area. Members who have suggestions are encouraged to provide names to Coleman-Beattie or Executive Director Roger Webb. She also noted that Jeff Kaufmann has been designated as the alternate representative to Don Henderson of the Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services. Kaufmann has received orientation and is in attendance at this meeting.

III. Chair’s Remarks

Durheim noted that reports from members who have recently attended conferences and other training events are included in meeting materials. Members are encouraged to read these summaries that include “takeaway moments” and useful ideas for future TCDD activities.

Durheim discussed member support during TCDD meetings. She noted that Coleman-Beattie had discussions with self-advocate members prior to the November 2009 meeting and the Executive Committee discussed this topic during this quarter’s meeting. While members with disabilities may need assistance or accommodations, the best way to provide that assistance varies depending on the member. Options may range from technology to personal support. Durheim also noted that members’ attendants have varying roles from providing only physical support to assisting with material. In order to allow for full participation from everyone, members were encouraged to review material ahead of time and ask for any assistance or clarification prior to the meeting. Some members have noted that bringing a notebook computer with the material “pre-loaded” makes it easier to manage. Members provided feedback on this topic including the following suggestions:

  • Hiring 1-2 attendants to work through the Council meetings and be on-call if a self-advocate needs assistance. This would alleviate members from outside the Austin area needing to recruit attendants to travel with them.
  • Modifications of material to make it easier to understand.
  • A glossary of terms that applies to the material.
  • Yellow cards or another device to alert the speaker that members are not following the discussion.

IV. Future TCDD Public Policy Collaboration Activities

Diana Kern reported for the ad-hoc workgroup and reviewed the work group report and recommendations for outcomes measures for future public policy collaboration activities and other considerations for those measures. The work group recommends outcome and performance measures for each of the four focus areas discussed by the Council during the February meetings. Those areas are collaboration between organizations, inclusion of individuals, sustainability of activities, and cross-cutting outcomes. Members discussed each focus area, its outcome measures and ways to qualify those measures, as well as ideas for activities and services related to each focus area. After a lengthy discussion, members agreed to continue those discussions in the Public Policy and Project Development Committee meetings. A recommendation was made to accept the outcome measures and considerations from the ad-hoc workgroup.

MOTION: To accept the recommendations of Public Policy Collaboration Outcome Measures as presented by the ad-hoc workgroup.

MADE BY: Diana Kern for the ad-hoc workgroup (motions from Committee actions do not need a second)

The motion passed with 11 in favor and 6 opposed. Amy Sharp and Frank Genco abstained from voting. (Attachment 1)


Durheim recessed the Committee of the Whole meeting at 2:06 PM.


Council Chair Brenda Coleman-Beattie joined the meetings and reconvened the Committee of the Whole at 5:30 PM in the lobby of the Omni Southpark Hotel.

V. Tribute to Rene Requenez

Coleman-Beattie recalled the contributions of Council member Rene Requenez prior to his untimely death in December 2009. Although he served on the Council for only one year, Requenez offered many suggestions for Council activities and policies. He and his work to improve the quality of life for people with disabilities will be missed.

Members then engaged in informal discussions.


Chair Coleman-Beattie adjourned the Committee of the Whole at 6:30 PM.

Roger A. Webb
Secretary to the Council

Attachment 1

TCDD Public Policy Collaboration

Outcome Measures and Related Considerations

Discussion Draft v4.0

Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act



TCDD Mission Statement

The mission of the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilities is to create change so that
all people with disabilities are fully included in their communities and exercise control over
their own lives.

TCDD Guiding Principles

All Council activities should be in alignment with the Council’s mission statement and

  • commitment to self-determination for individuals with disabilities and their
  • effort to ensure that there is appropriate representation in all activities by people from diverse cultures and disabilities;
  • best practices in the development and provision of services and supports, including an emphasis on measurable goals; and
  • collaboration between the Council, grantees, advocacy organizations and other groups, including non-traditional partners, in activities that are consistent with the Council’s mission.

TCDD State Plan Goal 10

People with developmental disabilities and family members will have the supports and
services they need to be able to participate actively in their communities.

TCDD State Plan Objective 2

Collaborate, each year of the State Plan, with other agencies and organizations on an ongoing basis to develop and promote concrete policy alternatives and best practices to ensure that individuals and families can access and maintain self-directed community-based services and supports of their choice.

Focus Areas

  1. Collaboration—Organizations
  2. Inclusion—Individuals
  3. Sustainability
  4. Cross-cutting Outcomes

The tables on the following pages are organized around these focus areas, derived from enabling statutes, the Council’s State Plan, and discussions of goals/objectives, values, issues, and specific recommendations from the November 12, 2010 Committee of the Whole meeting. The first three focus areas are directly related to Public Policy Collaboration (PPC) activities while the “Crosscutting Outcomes” area relates to various Council programs, including PPC. The primary focus of the PPC ad hoc workgroup is on the desired results/outcomes and related outcome measures described below. “Secondary” information from Council-generated ideas is also provided for context in facilitating the interpretation and discussion of outcome measures.

Primary Information

Result/Outcome Desired reflects more specific subsets of the Council’s State Plan Objective #2. These statements can be made even more specific by including outcome measure performance targets and timeframes.

Outcome Measures for these 3 primary PPC-related and 1 cross-cutting focus areas are written as percentages and reflect the desired results/outcomes.

Secondary Information

Other Measures, such as output measures (number of units of activities/services provided or number of people served), efficiency measures (dollar cost per activity/service or organization/individual served), and demand/explanatory measures (i.e. the universe to be collaborated with or served, or other relevant information) are intended to complement the outcome measures and are not intended to represent a comprehensive set of all program measures that might be used.

Qualitative Measures and Considerations include key assumptions, quality considerations, and other factors relevant to understanding a balanced view of the focus areas.

Activities and Services include activities and services specifically mentioned and emphasized by Council members. Some may be existing activities/services while others may represent new ones. The activities/services noted here are not intended to represent a comprehensive set of all activities/services that are currently being or that might be employed/provided.

Focus Area 1: Collaboration—Organizations
Result/Outcome Desired Effective/improved collaborations, coordination, and support involving key Council-identified organizations as well as non-traditional organizations
Outcome Measures
  • Percentage of key Council-identified organizations, including non-traditional and non-DD partners, that are part of particular state public policy collaborations
  • Percentage of state agencies aligning their programs and services to PPC goals and identified needs
  • Percentage of key PPC issues and goals successfully addressed through legislation or other means (e.g. funding levels, employment programs, priority services, attendant care pay rates and turnover, transportation access, low/slow Medicaid reimbursement rates, etc.)
  • Percentage of legislative and executive branch, community, business, and other Council-identified collaboration leaders indicating an awareness of key information (e.g. existence of the Council, priority issues, specific goals and proposals, etc.)
Other Measures (output,
demand, efficiency, explanatory)
  • Number of meetings, briefings, testimonies, events, training sessions provided/conducted (output)*
  • Number of people attending meetings, briefings, testimonies, events, training sessions (output)*
  • Number of key Council-identified organizations that are targeted to be part of the PPC (demand/explanatory)

*Note: These two output measures could be disaggregated to count each of the different types of activities/services should that detail be necessary.

Qualitative Measures and Considerations
  • Meetings – review documentation (minutes, attendance, etc.), discussion, consensus recommendations, public comments, identified activities evaluated/completed; provide information/reports; achieve goals (i.e., influence, etc.)
  • Identification of ALL organizations that need to be at the table, assure appropriate representation, avoid duplication or exclusion, create a space so people will come
  • Include self-advocates and promote self-advocacy
  • Improve communication within the Council and with external stakeholders to promote awareness and understanding
  • Additional comments/ideas from board members regarding the collaboration model:
    • Uses a contracted entity to provide core support for a coalition with multiple organizations (including TDDC) taking specific other roles (e.g. social and civic engagement and advocacy) and specific issue advocacy. TCDD should consider its role as a participant vs. convener
    • Joins other collaborative efforts that already exist via other funding
    • Considers paring things down and focusing more on a few specific areas/activities, and if we have a collaboration, one group can take the lead on multiple campaigns
    • Is careful that any change in the PPC model/approach ensures that positive components of the existing model/approach are maintained and that we do not lose ground
    • Regardless of the model, involves the Council in taking more leadership in stating its expectations
    • Continues to work with the same people to implement the new direction
    • Focuses on trust, public awareness, and practicality
Activities and Services
  • Peer to peer training and support
  • Youth activities and services, including leadership activities


Focus Area 2: Inclusion—Individuals
Result/Outcome Desired Effective/improved inclusion, representation, and active participation of people with disabilities in public policy collaboration activities
Outcome Measures
  1. Percentage of people/families with developmental disabilities surveyed indicating awareness of key information (e.g. existence of the Council, rights/responsibilities, local service providers, etc.)
  2. Percent increase in the number of people/families with developmental disabilities that have interacted with Council, obtained information, and acted on it
Other Measures (output, demand, efficiency, explanatory)
  • Number of people with developmental disabilities participating in/impacted by PPC activities/services
Qualitative Measures and Considerations
  • Communication issue(s) related to services/supports for people with disabilities and their families
  • Maintain and analyze demographic data (possible source: a diverse group of providers)
  • Access to the internet
Activities and Services
  • Scholarships
  • Youth activities/services


Focus Area 3: Sustainability
Result/Outcome Desired Deploy and maintain a public policy collaboration model that is sustainable
Outcome Measures
  • Percentage of collaborating organizations dedicating in-kind and/or other resources to PPC activities -And/Or-
  • Dollar amount of in-kind and other resources dedicated by collaborating organizations to PPC activities
Other Measures (output, demand, efficiency, explanatory)
  • Cost per disability organization collaborated with (efficiency) (global measure: number of organizations involved in PPC activities divided by total PPC costs)
Qualitative Measures and Considerations
  • Efficient and effective use of resources
  • Identification of new resources
Activities and Services
  • See other focus areas


Focus Area 4: Cross-cutting Outcomes
Result/Outcome Desired Effective/improved systemic strategies that improve the lives of people with developmental disabilities, allows them to live independently, and improves access to and opportunities for quality services that are self directed, community-based, and reflective of best practices
Outcome Measures
  • Percentage of people with developmental disabilities able to live independently and have an active social life
  • Percentage of people/families with developmental disabilities who have “access” to comprehensive, cutting edge, and effective services, health care, transportation, employment, education, etc. (this can be determined through periodic surveys, census, or focus groups)
  • Funding per capita
  • Rankings/ratings
  • Mortality/morbidity rates
  • Education levels
  • Workforce/employment levels
  • Income levels
Other Measures (output, demand, efficiency, explanatory)
  • Number of people with developmental disabilities served in various non-profit, private sector, and government (i.e. local, state, and federal) programs (output)
  • Number of people with developmental disabilities (demand)
  • Number of developmental disability-related organizations (demand/explanatory)
Qualitative Measures and Considerations
  • Elimination of barriers
  • Self-directed/self-determination (education, choice, and control)
  • Best practices and enhanced system design, generic and specialized services
  • Community-based (local access and best practices)
  • See other focus areas
Activities and Services
  • Non-specific disability, cross-disability, and functional service/support focus versus disability-specific services
  • See other focus areas

Facilitator Findings and Recommendations

  1. In considering the PPC model/approach, the Council should baseline/benchmark outcome measures (where possible) for the new model/approach against current outcome levels to determine if the new model/approach is working. And, careful attention should be paid to the selection, wording, and definition of any outcome measures the Council chooses to use.
  2. In considering changes to the mix of activities/services, determine if current activities/services:
    1. are addressing a priority need issue, and/or customer demand;
    2. reflect best practices and are delivered effectively/professionally;
    3. are achieving their intended results;
    4. are an efficient use of resources (i.e. produce highest results for the lowest possible cost when weighed against other available options); and
    5. should be maintained in light of the above considerations and new
      activities/services that are being considered.
  3. Before deploying specific outcome measures, CDD will need to develop detailed definitions of the measures (i.e. narrative description, definition of terms, calculation methodology/formula, source/reliability of the underlying data, limitations on the interpretation and use of reporting figures, etc.) to ensure accurate and consistent data collection and reporting over time.