1. CGHSFOA Accounting Conference May 19, 2017
State Allocations
CGHSFOA Accounting Conference
May 19, 2017

2. The Principal Allocations
Child Welfare Allocation Core Services Allocation Colorado Works (TANF) Allocation Child Care Assistance Program Allocation County Administration Allocation Adult Protective Services Allocation

3. Allocation Committees
Two Committees are created in Statute
Child Welfare Allocation Committee
Child Welfare Services and Core Services Allocations
Works Allocation Committee (TANF/Colorado Works)
Other allocations are the responsibility of the CDHS Executive Director
Operated through the PAC/Sub-PAC structure
County Admin, APS, Child Care

4. Child Welfare Allocation Committee Works Allocation Committee
Two separate committees created in statute with the same structure for membership
Eleven Members on each Committee
Eight members from Counties
One from each (CCI) Region (5 Regions)
Three from the CCI Large County Caucus (22 Counties)
County with the largest caseload must be represented
Three members from CDHS
Executive level person
Program expert
Financial/Budget expert

5. Child Welfare Services Allocation

6. Child Welfare Allocation
The allocation methodology is still under review for SFY – as of the date of the CGHSFOA Conference.

7. Core Services Allocation

8. Core Services Allocation
The committee – CWAC
Statutes are somewhat ambiguous about CWAC role
Determination was made by the CDHS Executive Director to use CWAC as a group of advisory stakeholders for CORE allocations
Allocation Model – Historical
Prior to SFY-13, the Core Services Allocation was based on the original amounts awarded to counties at the inception of the program, in the early 1990’s, plus additional allocations made at several points in time when additional funding became available.

9. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current
The first step in the annual allocation identifies the individual county amounts and the statewide total for Enhanced Funding for Evidence-Based Services and BOS Mental Health/Substance Abuse services. (preserve historical dollar amounts)
The remaining appropriation is then split between the Ten Large Counties and the Balance-of-State Counties.

10. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current
The amount awarded to each county in SFY-12 for Evidence-Based Enhanced Funding Services, was allocated, in the same amounts, for SFY-16
The amount awarded to each Balance-of-State county in SFY-12 for Substance Abuse Services and Mental Health Services was allocated to each Balance-of-State county for SFY-16.

11. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current
Beginning with SFY-13, the remaining appropriation was divided between the Ten-Large Counties (~73%) and the Balance-Of-State Counties (~27%) in the same proportion as had resulted in SFY-12
FOR SFY-14, the proportion of the total appropriation was adjusted to 75% for the Ten Large Counties and 25% for the Balance –of-State Counties
Currently, the split is approximately 78% for the Ten Large Counties and 22% for the Balance-of-State counties

12. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current:
The remaining appropriated funds are divided between the Ten Large Counties, and the Balance-of-State Counties to follow two separate operations.
In each of the TLC and BOS operations, the county allocations are based upon the following five cost driver categories
A) Households Below 200% of Poverty 45%
B) Referrals (2.75%) (actually, 5% of remaining 55%)
C) Assessments (5.5%) (actually, 10% of remaining 55%) 55%
D) Involvements (44%) (actually 80% of remaining 55%)
E) Out-Of-Home Placements (2.75%) (actually, 5% of remaining 55%)

13. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current
Each county’s allocation from the five Cost Driver Categories is compared to a “Floor” equal to:
90% for the Ten Large Counties (10% floor)
85% for the Balance-of-State Counties (15% floor)
of the SFY-15 allocation or $25,000, whichever is larger.

14. Core Services Allocation
Allocation Model – Current
Weights are applied to preliminary allocation results for counties designated by CDPHE as “Rural” (110%) and Frontier” (115%)
The application of the Floor and the Weighting for Rural and Frontier Counties requires that all county allocation calculations from the model be adjusted to “true-down” to the available funding.
The resulting calculations for each of the five Cost Driver Categories are added to the dollar-amount calculations (above) to arrive at each county’s preliminary allocation

15. County Administration Allocation

16. County Admin Allocation
Utilizes the framework of a Workload Study done by Deloitte in 2007
Activity-Based Costing (ABC) Methodology
Structure of Primary Activities to represent workloads
Average number of minutes to complete each activity
Uses data from CBMS – number of activities, by County
Examples: Completed application intakes, Failed Interactive Interviews, Redeterminations completed, Denials/Discontinuations issued, Inter-county transfers
Also uses county-reported data regarding EBT activities
Allocates funds appropriated to CDHS and HCPF

17. County Admin Allocation
Allocation Model
Data from CBMS and County EBT data to count quantities of activities completed, by County
Multiply count of each activity times the minutes it takes from the Workload Study
Sum each counties total “minutes”; convert to percent of State total minutes
Each county is allocated the percent of available appropriation
If the above does not calculate at least $105,329 for a County, that County’s allocation is elevated to that number (Base Allocation)

18. County Admin Allocation
County Admin Allocation at Close-Out
Surplus Distribution – unspent allocations are moved to overspent counties
Federal Pass-thru – acts as an increase to allocation
Any remaining county deficits are eligible for federal pass thru.
Federal Revenue earned based on statewide expenditures (but not covered within appropriations) increases allocation available.

19. Adult Protective Services Allocation

20. Adult Protective Services Allocation
Formula developed by a Task Group formed under the Finance Sub-PAC - Spring of 2013
Initial allocation followed County Admin method
SFY was the first year of an independent formula
SFY recommendations adopted by PAC earlier in May

21. Adult Protective Services Allocation
10 Large Counties
Workload Data 50% of Allocation
Data extracted from the CAPS system
“Case-Days” - - Sum of number of days each case is open in CAPS
Demographic Data % of Allocation
Data from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau)
Population 55 years and older and under 300% FPL

22. Adult Protective Services Allocation
Balance of State Counties tend to have greater fluctuations with demographic and caseload data Higher Demographics tend to mitigate fluctuations

23. Adult Protective Services Allocation
Balance of State Counties
Workload Data 55% of Allocation
Data extracted from the CAPS system
“Case-Days” - - Sum of number of days each case is open in CAPS
Demographic Data % of Allocation
Data from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau)
Population 55 years and older and under 300% FPL

24. Adult Protective Services Allocation
Two Segments of funding – Administration and Client Services
Both segments use the same basic formula.
For The Administrative Allocation:
5% floor - County allocation cannot decrease more than 5% from year-to-year
No minimum allocation for APS Admin
Client Services Allocation follows the same demographic and caseload weightings as the Administrative Allocations:
No Allocation Floor
$2,000 minimum base for all Counties

25. Adult Protective Services Allocation
Closeout of the client services funding is “vertical”
Essentially, a Surplus Distribution between counties
Unspent Client Services funding statewide is reverted
Close out of APS Administration is “vertical”
Surplus Distribution between counties
Unspent APS Administration funding will be added to County Admin surplus distribution

26. Colorado Works (TANF) Allocation

27. Colorado Works Allocation
The Committee – Works Allocation Committee The $150 million Colorado Works Block Grant appropriation is divided into six Cost Driver Factors (four demographic factors and two expenditure factors) and are weighted for their relative significance. The data to be used in calculating each of the six factors is to be the most recent available data.

28. Colorado Works Allocation
Allocation Formula
Demographic Factors
50% of the total formula, divided evenly between the four factors:
represent the population most likely to participate
A) Child Poverty Population (12.5%)
B) # of Children Enrolled in SNAP (12.5%)
C) # of Children Enrolled in SNAP Whose Family Income is below 50% of the Fed Poverty Limit (12.5%)
D) # of Children enrolled in Medicaid/CHP# (12.5%)

29. Colorado Works Allocation
Allocation Formula
Expenditure Factors
50% of the total formula
Represent the economics of county expenditures
A) County Expenditures in the Previous SFY on Basic Cash Assistance (BCA) and State Diversion (30%)
B) County Expenditures in the Previous SFY on All Other Colorado Works Block Grant Activities (20%)

30. Colorado Works Allocation
Allocation Formula
Counties who expended greater than 70.9% of their total Colorado Works expenditures in the previous SFY on Basic Cash Assistance and State Diversion are awarded the greater of the amount calculated or a minimum allocation of 140% of the amount they spent on BCA and State Diversion.
Counties are held to a maximum decrease of 5% from their prior year allocation and to a maximum increase of 25% over their prior year allocation (unless increase is driven by BCA calculation, above)
Counties with allocations less than $100,000 are kept from any allocation reduction.

31. Child Care Assistance Program Allocation

32. Child Care Allocation
The allocation methodology is still under review for SFY – as of the date of the CGHSFOA Conference.

33. Other Funding Child Welfare Collaborative Management (“1451”)
Allocations to participating counties
Option to retain General Fund savings
Employment First
Title XX Training
Chafee Independent Living
Promoting Safe and Stable Families
Single Entry Point Contracts
SafeCare
HCPF – Medicaid Outreach and Development Grants
Project or Goal-Oriented Grants
Child Support Services – retained collections and incentives
Recoveries – retained collections and incentives
Other County-based funding

34. State-based data systems are used for producing data that drives allocations. Accurate and complete data recording is essential !!!