Performance Management

Performance reports

Report Distribution

Reports are emailed to county directors; to obtain copies, please submit requests to DHS.HSPM@state.mn.us.

Report Schedule

Measure	Data available	Reports issued
Expedited SNAP SNAP and Cash Issued Timely	March	April
Child Maltreatment Recurrence Permanency Relative Placement Self-Support Index	June	July
Adult Repeat Maltreatment Adult Protection Initial Disposition Child Support Paid Orders Established Paternity Established	October	October

Performance Management System information

Minnesota’s human services delivery system provides programs and services to meet the basic health, welfare, and safety needs of all Minnesotans; particularly the poor, children, people with disabilities and the elderly. Counties, tribal governments and lead agencies deliver these services in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS).

In 2013, the state Legislature authorized the DHS commissioner to implement a Human Services Performance Management system for essential human services as described in Minnesota State Statute. This system includes the performance outcomes and measures consistent with the recommendations of the Steering Committee on Performance and Outcome Reforms (Steering Committee) in its December 2012 report to the legislature.

The system focuses on six population outcomes:

• People have access to health care and receive effective services.
• People are economically secure.
• Children have the opportunity to develop to their fullest potential.
• Children have stability in their living situation.
• Adults and children are safe and secure.
• Adults live with dignity, autonomy and choice.

Vison, mission and values

The Human Services Performance Council and the DHS Human Services Performance Management team developed the vision, mission, and values statements below to define the Performance Management system’s purpose, direction, and drivers of success.

Vision

An equitable, effective and collaborative human services system that ensures positive outcomes for the people we serve.

Mission

We work to improve performance in the MN human services system by building meaningful connections, measuring and reporting performance, providing data-informed improvement assistance, advancing equity to reduce disparities, and advocating for system change.

Values

The values of the Performance Management system are:

• Collaboration: DHS, counties, service delivery authorities, and communities work together — using inclusive processes and building strong relationships — to improve the lives of people served.
• Continuous improvement: Performance improvement is achieved through ongoing, incremental and targeted change, leading to meaningful results for people served.
• Equity: Equity and culturally appropriate strategies are deliberate, intentional and at the core of our work.
• Flexibility: Flexibility and creativity are used to adapt to the changing needs of those served.
• Reliance on data: Use data-driven measures, thresholds and improvement strategies to provide counties with meaningful information about their work.
• Responsibility: DHS and counties are responsible for actions, decisions, results and improvement efforts and are committed to striving for the best services for all Minnesotans.
• Sustainability: The Performance Management system and improvement methods are designed to be effective, efficient, and manageable.
• Transparency: Transparency and open dialogue with partners are central to the design, implementation, and monitoring of essential services being delivered.

Human Services Performance Council

The work of the council is to advise the DHS commissioner on the implementation and operation of the human services performance management system and to provide annual reviews and reports to the legislature related to human services performance management. (Minnesota Statutes, Section 402A.15).

The 20-member council was authorized by the 2013 Legislature as part of the establishment of a performance management system for human services. DHS has appointed three members each from tribes and communities of color, service providers and advocates and DHS. The Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC) and the Minnesota Association of County Social Service Administrators (MACSSA) have each appointed their three representative members.

Performance in counties with denominators of 20 or fewer

Many counties have denominators (the total number of people or cases in a measure) so small that meaningful performance assessment becomes difficult. For example, if a county with 500 children in foster care moves 400 of those children to permanency within 12 months we can be confident that their performance of 80 percent is consistently above the 40.5 percent threshold. A difference in one child would change the percentage by 0.2 percentage points. However, if a county has 10 children in foster care being above or below the threshold hinges on a single child (4 out of 10 children is 40 percent and 5 out of 10 children is 50 percent). This is not a meaningful assessment of that county’s performance. Being below the threshold for a single year due to one or two people not having the desired outcome does not necessarily indicate that a county is performing poorly. Performance is made clearer by considering additional data.

Process

The policy for assessing performance in counties with small numbers was updated and a policy update bulletin issued in 2022 (PDF). The process below reflects the updated assessment method.

• If a county has a denominator of 20 or fewer and is meeting the threshold for a measure, the county is performing to expectations and no further assessment will take place.
• If a county has a denominator of 20 or fewer and is not meeting the threshold for a measure, performance will be reviewed across two years of data.
• If a county has no people in a measure, it will be considered to be meeting the threshold.

Example

The following table illustrates county performance for the measure, of all children who enter foster care in a 12-month period, the percent who are discharged to permanency within 12 months of entering foster care. In those cases, where performance is below the threshold of 40.5% and a county has a denominator of 20 or less, performance will be assessed by looking at the previous year’s performance. Counties not meeting the threshold for two consecutive years would be subject to a PIP. See the explanation below the table for details about each county’s 2022 PIP status.

County	2021 Performance	2021 Denominator	2022 Performance	2022 Denominator	2022 PIP Status
Gerbera	41%	22	39%	18	No
Statice	35%	17	31%	13	Yes
Lotus	33%	15	56%	18	No
Dandelion	33%*	24	20%	15	No
Delphine	57%	21	27%	22	Yes

*PIP waived through the EC Claim process.

PIP Status Explanations by County:

• Gerbera – Gerbera County’s 2022 performance is below the threshold of 40.5%. However, their denominator was less than 20, prompting a review of their 2021 performance. Since their 2021 performance was above the threshold, Gerbera is not required to complete a PIP.
• Statice – Statice County’s 2022 performance is below the threshold of 40.5%. However, their denominator was less than 20, prompting a review of their 2021 performance. Since their 2021 performance was also below the threshold, Statice County will be required to complete a PIP, unless they apply and are approved for an EC claim.
• Lotus – Lotus County’s 2022 performance is above the threshold of 40.5%, they will not be required to complete a PIP.
• Dandelion – Dandelion County’s 2022 performance is below the threshold 40.5% and their denominator was less than 20, prompting a review of their 2021 performance, which was also below the threshold. Their performance is below the threshold for two consecutive years; however, their approved extenuating circumstances (EC) claim in 2021 forgives that year’s performance and a PIP is not required. Shading indicates that a county was below the threshold on that individual measure.
• Delphine – Delphine County’s 2022 performance is below the threshold of 40.5% and their denominator is above 20. Since they do not qualify for the small numbers policy, their 2021 performance does not influence the PIP decision. The county will be required to complete a PIP, unless they apply and are approved for an EC claim.

 

Performance by racial/ethnic groups

Race and ethnicity data are collected and reported differently by different divisions at DHS. Part of this is due to the data systems that are used for recording the data, but it is also driven by policies and the process by which the data are collected. Performance data for counties by racial/ethnic groups is provided where there were 30 or more people of a group included in the denominator. The race/ethnicity is that of the case applicant; other household members may have a different race/ethnicity. Be cautious when comparing racial/ethnic groups across program areas because they may be defined differently.

Child Safety and Permanency, Adult Protection, Expedited SNAP and cash applications

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity is reported separately from race. People are counted once by Hispanic ethnicity and with their reported race so groups added together exceed the total number of applications.

Asian and black people are reported once as Asian or black (their major race) and then by immigrant subgroup. Therefore, the black category includes Somali and other African immigrants and the Asian category includes Hmong and other Asian immigrants. Major race totals are reported to provide a comparison to other measures, like Child Safety and Permanency, and to assess racial/ethnic disparities across programs. Immigrant subgroups are provided because program planning and participant needs may differ for immigrant groups who may have additional documentation requirements and language barriers in completing forms. The groups are defined as:

• Asian American: People who mark Asian as their race on the Combined Application Form (CAF), have no nationality information known to MAXIS, the state’s administrative database, and are U.S. citizens. This includes second and subsequent generation immigrants.
• Hmong Immigrant: people who mark Asian as their race on the CAF and either have Hmong as their nationality or have Hmong as their spoken language and have immigration data known to MAXIS.
• Other Asian Immigrant: People who mark Asian as their race on the CAF and have a nationality or language other than Hmong.
• African American: People who mark black as their race on the CAF, have no nationality information known to MAXIS, and are US citizens. This includes second and subsequent generation immigrants.
• Somali: People who mark black as their race on the CAF and either have Somali as their nationality or have Somali as their spoken language and have immigration data known to MAXIS.
• Other African Immigrant: People who mark black as their race on the CAF and have a nationality or language other than Somali.

Self-Support Index

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity is reported as a race. People are counted once and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity supersedes any other racial or immigration data.

The S-SI reports black and Asian races by their immigrant subgroups. Immigrant subgroups are provided because program planning and participant needs may differ for immigrant groups who may have additional documentation requirements and language barriers in completing forms. The groups are defined as:

• Asian (non-Hmong): People who mark Asian as their race on the Combined Application Form (CAF), have no nationality information known to MAXIS, the state’s administrative database, and are US citizens and people who mark Asian as their race on the CAF and have a nationality or language other than Hmong. This includes second and subsequent generation immigrants.
• Hmong Immigrant: People who mark Asian as their race on the CAF and either have Hmong as their nationality or have Hmong as their spoken language and have immigration data known to MAXIS.
• African American: People who mark black as their race on the CAF, have no nationality information known to MAXIS, and are US citizens. This includes second and subsequent generation immigrants.
• Somali: People who mark black as their race on the CAF and either have Somali as their nationality or have Somali as their spoken language and have immigration data known to MAXIS.
• Other African Immigrant: People who mark black as their race on the CAF and have a nationality or language other than Somali.