LIHEAP PMIWG Briefing

July 26, 2016 1pm Eastern

AGENDA

1. Welcome and Introductions—Jenni Sullivan 2. PMIWG Committee Updates: Accomplishments, Goals, and Priorities

a. Communications Team—Susan Marshall b. Process Team—Jennifer Lee c. Data Team—Michael Schmitz

3. Overarching PMIWG Discussion, Recommendations—Jenni Sullivan

a. OCS expectations and conditions for public access of Data Warehouse. b. PMIWG engagement in the renewal of ICR for the LIHEAP Performance Data Form. c. OCS potential engagement with new NEUAC leadership. d. Engaging tribes and/or territories in Performance Management. e. Future meeting place suggestions (in addition to Washington DC once per year):

New Orleans Boston San Diego Portland Chicago

4. Questions, Discussion

PM Survey Questions September 2016

Q1 Which of the following barriers to implementing the new federal performance measures does Your state have? (Mark all that apply).

No barriers

Understanding the federal performance measures

Data Collections

Funding available for new system

Staffing

Sub-grantee Community Action Agency/Local Service Providers/Issues

Safeguarding confidential client information

Energy Supplier Issues (Utilities)

Other (explain further) Q2 Where is your state with implementing the federal performance measures?

Have not started yet

Identified the required changes and currently working on system changes

Collecting data but not reporting yet

Testing collected data

Ready to report

Already reported data Q3 Do you have barriers with collecting data from deliverable fuel vendors?

Yes

No Q4 Which types of barriers are you experiencing?

Vendor unwilling to report-corporate decision

Vendor unwilling to report – too burdensome

Vendor unwilling to report – privacy issues

Vendor unwilling to report – doesn’t see value

Comments (explain further) Q5 How is your state going to collect data?

Manually

Electronically Q6 The Performance Management Work Group hosts quarterly teleconference calls on topics

related to performance management and data collection. Are the conference calls beneficial and/or helpful?

Yes

No

Other (Explain)

Q6.a If no, what can we do to make them more beneficial? (open narrative box for response) Q7 What type of topics would you like to see discussed on future calls? Q8 Have you read any of the newsletters sent out from the Performance Management Work Group?

Yes

No

If yes, does the newsletter provide helpful information and tips?

Yes

No

Other Comments

If no, what are the barriers to reading it? (open narrative box for responses)

Q9 What other types of subjects/topics would you like to see covered in the newsletters?

August National Performance Management Call August 10, 2016 – 2 PM EST

Topics & Subquestions:

1. State Plan Submissions

How do you use public comments to change your plan? (Section 11 of Plan)

For states that run a year-round program, how do you report cooling in your plan? (Section 1, Q 1.1)

How are states projecting energy costs for the following year?

2. Using Data to Make Changes to Your Benefit Matrix Using Data

Does your plan incorporate data you harvested from your system? o If not, how are you making decisions?

How do you know you are paying the most money to folks with the highest energy burden?

3. Using Your Household Report Data to Make Decisions

How can you use your household report to make decisions and changes to your program?

What does your household data tell you?

Did you make changes, other than the amount of the benefits? What other changes?

4. Questions, Barriers & Strengths

What, if any, are your barriers to collecting the required data?

How are your vendor data exchanges going? Any surprises?

Did you experience barriers when dealing with subcontractors? How did you overcome them?

Did you experience barriers when dealing with your software vendor regarding reports or data exchanges? How did you overcome them?

PROCESS TEAM SIX MONTH GOALS, PRIORITIES (July 2016 Seattle Meeting)

Six Month Goal Action Steps What We Need

Move Virtual Library into out of Beta testing and into production phase. August 2016

Make sure the following are functional so that tool can go “live” on Clearinghouse: All components of the library functional (Help, Suggest a Resource, Provide Feedback) All links active and current

APPRISE/NCAT help to assure links are functional and current. NCAT will need ongoing resources from OCS to host library. This includes maintaining current links, and helping to fill information gaps (e.g. areas where there are minimal tools or guidance).

Re-categorize resources in “Performance Management” section of LIHEAP Virtual Library to reflect steps in Performance Management Process. August 2016- September 2016

Process Team to move currently listed Performance Measurement tools/guidance into the following new categories:

Collecting Data Reporting Data Analyzing Data Decision-Making and Planning Based on Data Using Data to Evaluate Decisions and Plans

The Process Team will also identify any additional examples, tools, or guidance that may fit in the above listed new categories.

NCAT and APPRISE to help make adjustments, update resources in LIHEAP Virtual library.

Develop “What, What-If, Then” Tool to help grantees 1) understand their data and 2) use it to make decisions. July 2016- December 2016

Using NEUAC workshop example as a starting point, Process Group will work with APPRISE to develop a tool for grantees based on the concept below. Will focus on one state (Alabama) for “prototype.”

APPRISE to provide technical support necessary to develop tool.

Other Process Team Discussion, Recommendations

1. “Best Practices” Tab on Performance Management Website. APPRISE asked the Process Team to make recommendations regarding the Best Practices tab in the Grantee Resources section of the Performance Management website. In addition to renaming the tab “State Examples”—the Process Team recommends that APPRISE organize state examples into the following Performance Management categories (or something like them):

Collecting Data Reporting Data Analyzing Data Decision-Making Based on Data Using Data to Evaluate Decisions

In the future (given time and additional resources)—the group suggests using a graphic to improve user navigation of state examples:

2. LIHEAP Virtual Library Index. In the future (given time and additional resources), the Process Group would like to see some kind of index

incorporated into the LIHEAP Virtual Library. The group suggested posting the current list of all library resources and allowing users to sort by field (e.g., type of document, author, program area, etc).

3. Tribal Allocation Data. In the future (given time and additional resources), the Process Group recommends that OCS consider adding tribal

allocations to the proposed “State Profiles” to be included in the Report to Congress. Group members indicated that they regularly receive questions from their legislators and other stakeholders regarding how much LIHEAP is awarded to tribes in their state. They suggest that including tribal allocations will provide a true and complete picture of LIHEAP in their states.

4. State LIHEAP Fact Sheets. In the future (given time and additional resources), the Process Group suggests that the Data Warehouse create a canned

fact sheet that can be printed off for each state. This would include key output and potentially outcome statistics. Currently, the LIHEAP Action Center attempts to do this (http://liheap.org/materials-hub/). Grantees have complained that although the data is outdated and out of context--utilities and other stakeholders regularly reference this site for information due to its accessibility.

Performance Management

State Examples

PMIWG Data Group July 2016 – January 2017 Action Plan

Priority Task Data Team

Role Resource Needed

Start

Month

End

Month Ongoing Status

1 Data warehouse: guided search Advisory APPRISE Jan-16 Sep-16

In Progress

1 Data warehouse: advanced search Advisory APPRISE Feb-16 Sep-16

In Progress

2 Data warehouse: public data Advisory APPRISE, OCS Jan-16 Sept-16 In Progress

2 Data warehouse: grantee reports Advisory APPRISE Jan-16 TBD X In Progress

2 June 2017 OMB reauthorization Advisory APPRISE Jul-16 Sep-16

3 Evaluate performance measures Lead APPRISE Jul-16 X

3 Data warehouse: performance measures

reports specifications Advisory APPRISE Aug-16 Jan-17 X TBD

4 Dashboard Advisory APPRISE, OCS July-16 TBD X ?

4 Data warehouse: management functionality Advisory APPRISE, OCS July-16 TBD X ?

5 Sub-grantee upload functionality Advisory APPRISE, SME, OCS July-16 TBD X ?

Task Descriptions

Data warehouse: guided search – Reviewing the improvements suggested, by the Data Group, to the guided search

Data warehouse: advanced search – Reviewing the improvements suggested, by the Data Group, to the advanced search

Data warehouse: public data – Advising OCS and APPRISE on making data publicly accessible

Data warehouse: grantee reports – Advising APPRISE to help identify and incorporate useful functionality from the LIHEAP Performance Management

website “Grantee Reports” section into the data warehouse.

OMB reauthorization – Advising whether or not the 2014 OMB justification is still applicable and if it should be revised for the June 2017 reauthorization.

Evaluate performance measures – Reviewing FFY 2015 voluntarily submitted performance data and data group members’ data including:

Consider revising performance measures to remove “Crisis” benefits from the indices

Consider impact of including ‘zero income’ households in the calculation

Review the submitted performance measures data to identify any other issues

Data warehouse: performance measures reports specifications– Advising APPRISE to help identify and develop reports using performance measures data

Dashboard – Advising APPRISE to help identify and incorporate useful functionality from the LIHEAP Performance Measures Readiness dashboard into the

data warehouse

Data warehouse: management functionality – Advising APPRISE on the development of some methodology for updating the data warehouse to allow for a

subject matter expert to maintain including adding and deleting additional reports

Sub-grantee upload functionality - Advising OCS and APPRISE on the development and implementation of a method to allow grantees (and potentially sub-

grantees) to include data at the subgrantee level in the data warehouse for analysis