--000000000000b3e69d05e5461b8d Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b3e69c05e5461b8c" --000000000000b3e69c05e5461b8c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thank you very much Tim! Sounds like the majority of these cases are instances where the client wants the caregivers to get paid, and it is easier for the scheduling team to put them in at that moment than to have to wait until each day. In an ideal world, I imagine we would want to wait until after the shift dates, but logistically that probably creates way more issues than it is worth. We will continue to monitor these cases from the data side. Thanks all! On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 11:01 AM Timothy Thomas wrote: > Sorry for the delay, I was waiting to hear back from the local teams. > > Vancouver > 1. For all Clients except Jiany, they are doing live-in and we clock the > caregivers in and out for their breaks. > 2. For Jiany, the caregivers work with both Jiany and Yaghooby > (mother-daughter team), doing 1 hour for Jiany and 3 hours for Yaghooby, so > we manually clock in the caregiver so she doesn't have to clock in and out > twice for the same shift > > Montreal > Joanne Fitzpatrick was on vacation from July 11th to July 22nd. The client > wanted to pay the caregiver for the entire 2 weeks so all shifts were > clocked in and out prior to the date. > > Let me know if you have any additional questions. > Tim > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 11:11 PM Angie Markwell > wrote: > >> Sent to Tim >> >> On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 3:08 AM Benjamin Lewis >> wrote: >> >>> Ok thank you both. Angie, the majority were coming from Canada in this >>> batch. Would it be alright if I reach out to that team to see if they want >>> to help clean it up? >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 7:51 PM Angie Markwell >> angie.markwell@thekey.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I defer to Chen's explanation as I would think logically it should not >>>> - would love to get this addressed and cleaned up and ensure we can stop >>>> practice. I worry someone is either intentionally or unintentionally >>>> working the system. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 4:11 PM Chen Xie wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not on my end, with the possible exception of a way to put in a >>>>> non-billable CCM visit without triggering a clock in requirement. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 12:08 PM Benjamin Lewis >>>> benjamin.lewis@thekey.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>> >>>>>> We have made the decision to exclude these from the metrics it is >>>>>> causing issues for in the interim, but are there any known cases for why >>>>>> staffing would mark a shift as complete before the date of the shift? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 12:23 PM Benjamin Lewis >>>>> benjamin.lewis@thekey.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Angie, David, and Chen, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The data team identified the attached shifts as causing an issue in >>>>>>> our reporting, as they show shifts as completed but we had not reached that >>>>>>> date yet (data was pulled 7/21). W