Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ccs Intake topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CCS intake staff urge county to add intake workers and electronic signatures rather than a supervisor
Summary
County CCS intake staff told the committee they can reduce a two‑to‑three month wait for Comprehensive Community Services (CCS) enrollments by adding frontline intake workers and implementing an electronic signature tool, not by adding a supervisor and lead social worker as proposed by management.
A staffing amendment to speed up enrollment in Dane County’s Comprehensive Community Services drew a divided response Tuesday: county management proposed adding a supervisor and a lead social worker in the CCS intake unit, while the intake team — supported by its union — urged supervisors to authorize two additional intake workers and an electronic signature platform instead.
Current CCS staff said the main bottleneck is the volume of required paperwork and the time it takes to obtain physician prescriptions and signed releases of information; they told the committee they currently log roughly 59 days from a completed application to enrollment and that about 137 people were ready to schedule intake appointments. In a statement signed by 21 of 22 members of the intake team, staff said adding supervisors would not increase throughput because supervisors do not perform intakes: "If the goal is to decrease the wait times and increase the number of people we enroll, then we need to add more intake workers who are able to do enrollments," the letter said.
County staff and supervisors acknowledged training and quality‑assurance responsibilities in the CCS intake unit. Todd Campbell, a county manager, said supervisors are stretched supervising 12 intake staff each and that leadership and QA cover additional compliance duties with community service facilitation agencies. Campbell said adding supervisory capacity could improve deadlines and coverage for leave and training — but added that some process improvements, notably an electronic signature capability, would also reduce time to enrollment.
Supervisors asked for additional analysis of how many intakes two additional intake workers would permit and what one or both options would cost. No final vote was recorded; the committee retained the amendment for further discussion, and supervisors asked staff to look for grant or Medicaid administrative match revenue as potential fund sources for intake capacity.
