1. Using GPRA to Improve Services Lessons from Wisconsin SAMHSA Strategic Planning for Providers to Improve Business Practices October 2009, Arlington, VA Michael Nunley, Ph.D. Coordinator of Research and Evaluation Milwaukee County Behavioral Health Division

2. Eight points in this presentation  Two philosophical points  Four bits of practical advice  Two examples

3. Milwaukee WIser Choice  2500-3000 clients/year –15% Specific Corrections Populations (Reentry, Alternative to Revocation, Pre-Trial Diversion, Milwaukee County Drug Court) –85% “General Population” (45% Criminal Justice-involved)  3 CIUs (+ Drug Court CIU)  5 Recovery Support Coordinator Agencies (+ Drug Court RSC)  43 Clinical Treatment Providers  66 Non-clinical Recovery Support Service Providers

4. Program Evaluation Process

5. Two philosophical points  Client outcomes should be integrated into ALL system management  Follow-Up GPRA offers the best outcomes data available

6. Four bits of practical advice

7. 1. Keep it Simple –NOMs offers good minimal set 2. Run Regular Quarterly Reports –Avoid Ad-hoc analyses 3. Tie GPRA Results to Other Data 4. Show Change with Rolling Data

8. Milwaukee WIser Choice

9. First Example: Intensity of Day Treatment

11.  Conclusions –More hours Day Treatment in first 28 days may improve long-term recovery –Need to continue to monitor data

12. Second Example: Hispanic-Latino Ethnicity

14.  Conclusions –Those self-identified as Hispanic-Latino are more likely to have positive factors at intake but improve less after six months –Early drop-out from treatment may be reason