CPG Meeting Minutes - January 21, 2009
IHIV PREVENTION COMMUNITY PLANNING GROUP MEETING
January 21, 2009
10:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Present CPG Members:
- Brinegar, Emily
- Grieb, Jody
- Lozano, Dolly
- Rush, Nathan
- Gillespie, Tony
- Grudi, April
- Morton, Ramon
- Stanley, Debra
- Gilmore, Ramona
- Harris, Larry (State Co-Chair)
- Nash, Rico
- Urias Hail, Anna
- Goode, Angela
- Hughes, Mark
- Pasco, Larry
- Vesga, Jesus
- Greene, Latorya
- Lausch, Judy
- Prado-Reyna, Laura
- Woods, Wendy
Absent CPG Members:
- Hillis, Jessica
- Nix, Ryan (Dolly Lozano Proxy)
Present ISDH Staff:
- Arnold, Vivian
- Bain, Cena
- Johnson, Elloise
- Renner, Sarah
Absent ISDH Staff:
- Lloyd, Lisa
Present Technical Advisors:
- Exom, Michael
- Ohmit, Anita
- Yoder, Beth
- Feldheiser, Rochelle
- Quintero, Liliana
- Morgan, James
- Wilder-Hamilton, Elonda
Absent Technical Advisors:
- French, Paula
- Carr-Watkins, Michelle, NBAC
- Reynolds, Byron
- Meeting was called to order at 10:05 by Ramon Morton, Community Co-Chair and Cena Bain, CPG Liaison
- All Attendees introduced themselves, region, and populations they represent.
Note: Dolly Loazno is the Proxy for Ryan Nix.
If you are not sure what population you represent, they are located in your manual.
Mission: The CPG Represents the federal mandate of partnership between the community and ISDH to address HIV/AIDS, HIV Prevention, and develop a statewide prevention plan.
Cena Bain: Reads Ground Rules
Ramon Morton: Determines that Quorum was met with one Proxy.
Review of December’s Retreat (Highlights), December 15th and 16th:
Debra Stanley: The highlights that were captured or share my thoughts.
Ramon Morton: Share your thoughts.
Actually I liked the retreat, I enjoyed it myself very much, one of the best parts was Mike Wallace, it was a good opportunity to reflect and look at our strengths and weaknesses and then for us to just review some of the things that got off-track and where we need to go. I hope that we do that every year, because we have not done that for a while. As listed in the highlights, there were strengths and weaknesses.
We now have the opportunity to now work with the State and develop a great plan, a plan better than that there has ever been before.
I think the moderator interjected herself too much into the conversation. To my understanding moderators are to be there to make sure the meeting continues, in my opinion she interjected herself too much and I think the moderator had too close of a relationship with the Indiana State Department of Health, she was interjecting and she had no business to interject herself, their opinions do not count, she was just a moderator, she is just suppose to be there to keep the meeting flowing that is my understanding of a moderator.
That was something that had been brought up with her. The whole thing, that first day was just an open forum to give people the chance say what they wanted without feedback or any rebuttal from the State. We talked about that.
Just an echo, Larry’s concern, the discussion was described a penalty free session where all parties could have the opportunity to speak with people in the room to identify strengths and weaknesses of this process and with that said, a facilitator is just there for that, to facilitate the meeting and keep it moving along, document, see clarity. I wasn’t there and from what I was told, I was the one that identified the facilitator and what was shared with me is that there were several points that she sort of protected one or the other and that wasn’t the request and that wasn’t the intent, it wasn’t suppose to be us against them, it was suppose to be about the process. And if anyone walked away with that then somewhere there was an error.
I just have question about the second bullet point where the CPG lacks the ability to implement the plan, are we talking about the Statewide plan?
Yes. That was the point. And if the person is the room that stated that they could possibly expand on that.
I think it was Paula and she is not here.
I have a correction, I was there on the 16th and you do not have me listed on there.
I will correct it. Thank You.
Minutes for 11/18/08 CPG Meeting reviewed:
We have decided that any corrections that needed to be made should have been submitted to Cena before the meeting.
Do we consensus on the minutes?
Let the body be advised that silence equals consensus.
CONSENSUS MADE, MINUTES APPROVED.
Minutes for 1/5/09 Executive Conference Call reviewed:
Does anyone have any questions?
The date is wrong; it should read January 5, 2009.
I have a question, when it talks about CPG members doing their own regional meetings, when can we talk about that?
We can talk about that when we talk about our goals.
Ramon Gilmore: Okay.
That is just something that we looked at, nothing has been concrete yet, Cena had looked at what it would cost to do a CPG regional meeting in Merrillville, that is not necessarily where we would go but the regional meetings that we have been having dialogue about was each region having their own meeting.
SKIP IN TAPE; PORTIONS WERE EXCLUDED.
Ted Forbes is our project officer and he had recommended a facilitator to make our meetings more efficient. We had a TA that sit in on our Executive Conference call and our co-chair call. He said our group was doing very well but did say that we could do some things that would make a meetings a little more efficient and that is who was handling our paperwork beforehand.
Yesterday we sit down and looked at your applications and reviewed what you had expertise in and it was nice because some of you requested a specific committee, Cena is passing the list around right now.
When you look at the bottom at the Ad Hoc Committee’s; the Ad Hoc Committees meet on an as needed basis, so it is not totally necessary to be on an Ad Hoc Committee, if the opportunity arises or a need is determined we usually give the opportunity for individuals to join an Ad Hoc committee. If I see something that I think you might be good at I am going to come and ask you, and if you see something that you have an interest in with another committee, you can be on more than one committee you can work all four of them if you like. And if have an issue you can always come up to me or Cena and talk about it.
Do you have to be an active member on a particular committee to have input.
No, even with the committees you have always have outside persons, the only time that it is important for you to a voting member is when we have an issue that needs to be voted on, you can have an outside person that has some more expertise to sit in on your committee.
Any questions regarding the committees?
I am not on there.
Your not on there? You should be under the Membership Committee.
You ain’t getting out of that.
Okay so everyone will be getting a new one electronically.
I have an interest in being on the Interventions Committee.
Ramon Morton: Okay.
I also have an interest, I heard Ramona speak about doing DEBI’s in her region, there are a few people in this area that in terms of the State I think that we need to step up to the plate, exciting new processes going in the interventions committee.
While everyone is having a timeout, I just want to add something about the retreat, although we were having a penalty free session, it was also a celebration at the end of the year of who were are and the work that we do, and we got some gifts, I just want to say Cena-those are some good ink pens, I like those. We got a clock and an ink pen.
Executive Committee Report
I do not have a lot for the Executive Committee report, we will talk more about the regional meetings under new business and exactly what that means.
Yesterday’s orientation went pretty well, what do guys feel?
I would have liked to see a little more about populations and a little more about the functionality. Some of the procedures were covered, but some of the things were not covered. I liked what the TA’s did in regards to introducing themselves I would have liked to have seen this from the new members as well. And I don’t know if you have plans on doing that along the way, but I ran into April and we had an interesting conversation on the way into the building. I think relationships in this kind setting are important and can help advance and strengthen the process so we can start to form relationships with colleagues around the State is a good thing.
And not just for the new members but for the new members that do not know the old members.
I also think what we missed is there is a mentor process that we have, and we have not done that, but each one of you should be put with a mentor, you can call them if you have a question, but you should be assigned a mentor in case you have questions. One of the things that came up yesterday if people really know what CPG is and why they are here. I think we did a pretty good job in answering that but if you don’t know ask.
One of the things that I do want you to know is that this is not your opportunity to come here and do agency work, for me I sit on the board of the Aliveness Project and I am associated with Tony Gillespie, but I do not receive any money for the work that do around HIV, I am a hairstylist by trade, so why I am here, I don’t make money so I am strictly here for the community and that is what everyone around the table today should be here for.
We should have gone into a little more detail on Conflict of Interest and what that means. You are an advocate for the population that you represent; you should be going back to the community and seeking their needs and when you come back to the meeting that is who you are representing. When we do our priorities, you do not step away from that seat you are in but you look at the most important priority population. Like we know that Larry represents IDU’s he is going to let us know that. When we decide priority populations you have to look at the numbers, we are not here to try and seek funds for your organization, that is not why we are here and that is where the conflict of interest comes, we are going to point that out and bring it to your attention. We are here to ensure that the funds that we do get go to the right priority population, not that any population is not important, they have to match the numbers.
What Nate was talking about the whole network thing, it is actually on our calendars of events to take place, but I would recommend that we move one of those networking sessions up to January, that we begin the year with that networking.
Is that in our by-laws.
No, it is just on our calendar of activities that we would plan for it is two months that they are scheduled for.
It is part of our policies and procedures, so we will have to vote for it. Right now they are delegated for April and September for 45 minutes., so you want it for January and?
I am just saying that it needs to happen earlier rather than later. We can schedule it for March, because January is over. The importance of it is what I am getting at.
What we can do is add it as part of our orientation, be a little more detailed about our introductions.
Something else would maybe be a profile of each our members.
Yeah we all have that because we use that to select the members, so that just needs to be extended and a part of the package.
So, I still have that so I can just change the applicant’s number to the name and send them out electronically to everyone that is on CPG including technical advisors.
I want to respond to one piece about funds and this body, in my mind I feel like Indiana is lacking as a whole community as far as CDC’s announcement to my understanding that the only time Indiana got CDC money is when they got 9-9 dollars from the Indiana Minority Coalition in terms of community based organization. I guess my question is as a body I would like to see some of those funds come into Indiana, wherever the numbers indicate, is it something we talk about when our announcements come down “how are we going to get this money.” Like with the Interventions committee, getting that information our to the community so people can apply and how we strengthen our community, is that against what we are about?
No, that is exactly what we are about, the community at-large, what I am talking about is you coming here to get money for your agency.
There have been some small money grants that Larry knew about and that is important, what I am talking about is your own personal organization
When Nate spoke about the populations, did you want to know about what each population was? Would tab help you on that?
I Got it, but when I came here yesterday and was asked to give my population, I didn’t know what that meant, I mean I get it now. I am just thinking about the people just coming into the body.
Well population introductions, we use to do it from time to time.
That is why I explained to people after the introductions to look in their manuals, but when we come acquainted with the populations we will all get it. But whatever you pleasure.
Based on these recommendations, if you want to know more about the members and the TA’s I have asked the membership committee to include in their presentation an introduction, so those with blue cards introduce themselves like TA’s did yesterday. Number 2, with these recommendations with Nate raising the issue about Indiana not really receiving any CDC dollars, we are on the federal funding list where we are one of the States that receive very few federal dollars outside of State and governmental agencies so a really simple twist to our process would be looking at our Ad Hoc committees like Budget committee and adding Resource to the title, Budget/Resource committee. In stead of just looking at CPG funds but also looking at funding opportunities and disseminating them. This tweak would no cause a by-law change because it is an ad hoc committee. I think it is important for us to discuss process improvement but that is also what our self-assessment forms are for. I would really hate to see the plus and minuses of the orientation process get lost so let’s really take advantage of the self-assessment forms today.
I did not have a lot for the executive committee and I just a little bit of feedback so.
Typically in the past we had written division updates that we sent out to everyone beforehand, as of January 1, we had a new division director and she asked that we not provide a written copy because we will be providing a written copy of the minutes following today’s meeting; however with that said as with the past, we have had difficulties program managers submitting their information to me so I have 2 from other people and 1 of myself. So, Erika Chapman is out Viral Hepatitis Program Manager she has some trainings going on Hepatitis 101 and Hot Topics, I have the date information to hand out if you are interested I can also have Erika send out information if you would like.
Shawn Carney, Services Manager. He indicates that the federal application was handed in on time. This award will be made in late March.
The waiting list is down to zero. That is great news.
As far as Prevention, I can only say what I am doing. We were awarded $65,000 for our MSM Supplemental funding we have the contract in place and we are waiting for the hard copy to come back and I will be the contact person for that we are going to develop focus groups, we have DR. Bailey has our consultant that we will use, he was recommended by Tony and his resume is like 7 pages long, we are really excited to use him and we hope to write a Strategic Plan that specific to MSM’s, that is good news to get that started as well. That is all I have for division updates.
Just a quick clarification, so the purpose of that plan is to just develop a needs assessment for that population not to at this point provide funding for those services.
Our plan is, with money allowing, to do a needs assessment, develop a statewide plan and if money is left over we hope to implement some of that plan.
Not to step on anyone’s toes, this was talked about before you came along. But when we first spoke of this opportunity we had talked about not necessarily making it statewide, so we selected the top 5 cities with the disease prevalence 1. Lake, 2. St. Joseph, 3. Marion, 4. Allen, 5. Unknown. We have picked those 5 areas and that is where the focus groups will take place. The interventions piece will take place at the end if there is money left over.
I just want to intervene, MATEC is sponsoring Erika Chapman’s training and it is going to include the rapid test and it is going to happen the first Tuesday in February, so please come.
Just for clarification, we will not be receiving a written update even though the last meeting there was concise format and everyone agreed and that was suppose to be what we would be seeing from now on, so now we will not be seeing written updates at all.
Yes that is correct, you will not be receiving written updates prior to the meetings, the division updates will be given verbally and documented in our meeting minutes.
So you will deliver all division updates.
Well hopefully Larry will. Yes the State Co-Chair will deliver all division updates to the entire body verbally. This is the Division Director's decision.
I guess as long as we get accurate information in writing but historically part of the problem was that the information has been so inconsistent and things were provided as spontaneous.
Well let me clarify, I will still be requesting information from our program managers. Larry himself will have a copy of that and he will read it aloud to everyone and it will be documented, so that is how it will be. It will come from the program managers so hopefully none of that will occur, but at the same time even when we did the written reports, there was a lot of things that the program managers themselves did not put in their reports.
And I will say we are now having staff meetings within each program, so all the information that was lost within certain sections, we will all be on the same page.
I will put it in writing and move on.
I think part of the problem is that we find out too late about the trainings. We would find out too late to register for trainings. I will put it in writing too. But maybe you need to e-mail things to us.
When I get something I forward it as soon as I get it.
Any other questions regarding the division update?
The membership has requested for approval of the Self-Evaluation. The membership committee also asks for changes to be made to the roles and responsibilities of the committee chairs, removing the 12 month rule and to include the roles and responsibilities of the standing committee membership.
CONSENSUS WAS MADE AND THESE ITEMS WERE APPROVED
The membership committee has also requested a by-law change, changing the attendance policy; the request indicates that proxies will be considered absences and a member is only allowed miss 1/3 of the annual meetings.
A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THIS CHANGE WAS SENT OUT ON 1/22 IN WHICH EVERYONE WAS ASKED TO VOTE VIA E-MAIL; IN WHICH THE DEADLINE FOR THAT VOTE IS 2/22.
** All members were asked to select a number. Prior members selected first followed by new members. If an individual selected an even number they are required to re-apply for the year 2010, if an individual selected an odd number will not have to re-apply until the year 2011.
** All members wrote their names on the number in which they selected and handed back to Cena .
Lunch 12:10 – 1:10 p.m.
PRESENTATION PRESENTED BY MICHELLE CARR-WATKINS-NBAC
** Miss Carr-Watkins contact information is as follows:
Regional Site Coordinator (Michigan & Illinois)
HIV/AIDS Prevention Project
1701 W. Monterey
Chicago, IL 60643
Ph: (888) 622-2774 Toll Free
Ph: (407) 489-8756
** Each committee convened in order to set up meetings for the year.
Asks that the policy regarding the Standard Code of Conduct for Advisory Bodies remove number 5; as the CPG strongly encourages IDU’s and some members may be actively using.
* Comments were made adding the word disruptive to the language; however, Jim
Morgan stated that wording must be concise as the term “disruptive” can be interpreted in
** It was noted that the body that perhaps some of the language should be changed and
that it should be referred to the Policy and Procedure Committee.
*** Miss Debra Stanley notes that the policy is a State policy and not a policy comprised
by the CPG body.
CHSPAC; this goes somewhere in our policies and procedures that fits the description of CHPAC and how CPG; and I do not know if this is a change but I just want a little more clarification, per our policies and procedures this body has two seats designated to serve as liaisons between from CPG to CHSPAC and I was one of those liaisons and one of our meetings last year, Debra was liaison. As this reads, these seats are designated for liaisons from CHPAC and there has been some confusion because CHSPAC came to CPG to recruit membership and participation, which is a great thing, but now it has caused some issue to where now I have to vote on who I want on, so I just need some clarification, if these are seats that designated from CHSPAC to CPG and there were two seats and only one was filled, why are we now voting on it? If the reality is that there has been some modification on the CHSPAC end of things then we need to look at how this impacts CPG. The seats were designated so that anyone from this planning body can serve on that planning body and of course anyone can apply for CHSPAC but that has nothing to do with the liaisons role. It has caused some confusion.
Well I don’t, I guess I am not understanding where the confusion is and maybe that is what the situation is, CHSPAC matrix has no relevance to us. As our policies and procedures really, I mean it is not in CHSPAC’s policies and procedures to select who WE have decided to be on CHSPAC, if that makes sense?
I am sorry could you repeat that.
It is not in their policies for CHSPAC to take on who CPG has selected to be on their board; basically, we can not force CHSPAC, it is not in their policy to even accept our policy, we can not force CHSPAC to take on who the CPG body has selected. Now if only two members have applied for CHSPAC and they are also on CPG then that is it, those are the only two people and that is the bottom line, there was no one else that applied. This year there were several people that are on CPG that have also applied for CHSPAC or who are on CHSPAC, and their polices and procedures are different from ours where we do not have a matrix, they set up a table and a that person has to meet certain criteria and their board does not vote on that specifically, and our board does. Our whole membership does, I have no say so, neither does Larry or the division director choose who is on our board, I merely take the applications to the membership committee and they select who they want and then the entire body says yes or no. CHSPAC does not work that way, so if every single one of you decided to apply for CHSPAC you can, CHSPAC will then decide what seat you fill whether it is the CPG seat or it’s region 7.
It seems like the issue is that we need to go back and amend our policy because originally that was conceived, historically, the concept of the liaison seat was reciprocal. If there has been a modification, we still have two CHSPAC seats open on CPG and the concept was reciprocal and in the past there have been two CPG slots on CHSPAC, I understand that they don’t have to take on who we select, but in the spirit of creating a linkage between the two planning bodies community representation in creating a linkage in tying the full bodies that was purpose, so if there has been a change, it was a request 6 months ago, we need clarification how that reciprocal relationship is going to work, we need some modifications made to our process.
There may have been a reciprocal process or a relationship that CHSPAC and CPG had; however, the issue with CHSPAC is that nothing was written down.
It was too, and it was result of an extended process where consultants were hired for the purposes of making two bodies as one prevention/services body, that did happen so our contingency plan was that reciprocal relationship in creating those seats, and it was provided in writing, that is history and now is now.
Either way, regardless of how the process was handled, which I understand is a problem, regardless we have more than enough representation, more than enough that our own policy requires for us to have CPG representation on CHSPAC and visa versa.
That is the point that I am making, just because I am on CPG and that I applied to CHSPAC does not mean that this body selected me.
But that matrix does not apply to us, if you are put on CHSPAC under region 7, our by-laws, if our body wants you to represent CPG then you can, I mean their matrix is completely irrelevant to who we select to represent us on CHSPAC
But then that provides a conflict of interest, because I represent Part F on CHSPAC and it is going to be completely different from the role that I serve representing a whole community.
But you are the liaison.
I understand that you are trying to explain something that was explained to you, you have been misinformed. Things have been thrown away, just like when you came on there were selected things that were gotten rid of, when people don’t want to follow policy and when people don’t want to follow rules they just throw them away. That is the situation that you are in now, so what we are asking for at this time is tell us how it is, don’t give us, and see that is what ticks us off is that you try to feed us some bull crapola that we know is not true, okay, I am just saying stop this right now, you can’t explain it because it has been explained to you erroneously, you have been mis-educated so I want to keep our wonderful, loving relationship as it is and so that is what……..don’t even try you can’t explain it.
Excuse me, I have had my hand up for a very long time.
I got you Jody, please let Debra finish saying what she was saying, we do not want to get the process aggravated. I understand that it is very passionate, but we have to learn for everyone to talk at one time allow a person to get finish and then I will call on you, I am not missing anyone, I see you Debra was still talking, once she is finished I got you Jody. Let’s stay respectful, we can get to bashing each other, that is not what it is about.
I am just saying that we are trying to move forward and we need to proceed.
Who is the rules committee chair? Is their a committee that is in charge of things like this?
Policies and Procedures.
I move that the committee sits down with Cena and Telisa and work something out. Because nothing is going to happen until the groups agree.
As a member of that committee, may I just ask, what is your pleasure?
You need to have a meeting on that.
For me there needs to be clarity for Judy to take back the wishes of this body. What I would like to see, if we appoint someone from CPG to represent this body, I would like that respected and not tell us that it is irrelevant. To me that is totally, totally, totally, no matter how many mutual members sit on the bodies, if we want certain people representing this body. It is kind of like electing someone for congress and them telling us their irrelevant.
If it is not clear here, then Judy will walk away as a new member walking away without a clear understanding. So my intent was to get clarity. Our wish is clarity on where our liaison fits on that matrix for CHSPAC.
So you want to have control over their policies and right now we only have control over their policies.
Right, so let’s definitively understand what their policies are so we can renew our policies.
I just want to say something to Cena, that a lot of records and policies have disappeared for the sake of expedience. It seems, like the written division update, that is new that is a policy decision not our decision, now we have things missing from the CPG archives and minutes. So my recommendation be that the body somehow control our minutes, whatever we produce we need to find a way to control those documents. Not the Department of Health, whatever documents we produce as a body we should have access to those documents whenever we want them, we need to for the communities' sake.
So what I am hearing is that you are volunteering to transcribe the minutes [laughs] [body laughs]?
Whether it be a file cabinet or something, we should have access to it.
As far that particular piece with CHSPAC, you have what you need right?
Judy Lausch: I think so.
Actually, I am going to put myself on that committee for now so I will work with you and Ryan on that.
Thanks the State of Indiana for their help in making the Russian Delegation Visit successful.
Announcements & Celebrations
Adjourn at 3:00 p.m.
NEXT MEETING ON March 17, 2009 AT 10:00 A.M.