A Koochiching County official this week said the Community Services Department is facing a chemical dependency assessment dilemma.

Terry Murray, director of the county Community Services Department, told the Koochiching County Board this week that the county is currently without someone to perform Rule 25 chemical dependency (CD) assessments.

“I was going to start looking at what our options are,” he said Tuesday.

Many referrals to treatment centers are based on the results of a Rule 25 assessment, which refers to the administrative rule that addresses chemical-use assessment, administrative requirements and appeal and fair hearing rights of the client. All 87 Minnesota counties, 11 American Indian Tribes, and nine state-contracted managed care organizations are required to provide a Rule 25 assessment to anyone who requests one, or for whom a chemical-use assessment is requested. Use of a standardized, uniform, state-developed assessment tool was implemented in July 2008, according to the Minnesota Department of Human Services website. A 0-4 score from the assessment determines the level of care a patient needs, and what kind of risks are involved.

Last March, the board agreed to contract chemical dependency service assessments on a full-time basis with Sharon Frank, one of the current contracted assessors, with the stipulation that local referrals will be made when necessary.

“It's unfortunate, but the contract with Sharon Frank...part of the agreement was that she wasn't going to be taking any long vacations and she took a month off,” Murray said. “Now, she's gone until February.”

In addition, Murray said last week, he was informed that the Rule 25 assessor at Pineview Recovery Center in Littlefork is no longer at the treatment facility.

“Now we've got a whole bunch of people who have to get assessments and we've got nobody to do them,” Murray said.

Murray said Frank will return in February, however, he doesn't want to run into similar situations in the future.

Commissioner Wade Pavleck asked Murray if bringing someone from Northland Mental Health in Grand Rapids would be a viable option.

“That's something I could look into and see what the costs are,” Murray said.

He continued that another option would be to again have county staff perform the assessments, depending on the cost.

“If Northland isn't an option, I'm going to have to ask to bring it back in house for a number of reasons,” he said.

One reason, Murray said, would be he has more control over people providing the assessment services.

“I could approve a month's vacation,” he said. “I have no control of back-up providers...If it comes out that the cost isn't going to be minimal, I think the option would be to keep it back in house.”

Still, that could present challenges – including hiring someone to do the assessments.

“The only other person I had trained for (Rule 25 assessments) isn't working with us anymore,” he said. “We're in a dilemma right now and I don't know how I can get out of it.”

Murray said he would research costs of using Northland Mental Health's services and bringing the assessments back in house.

“I will talk to Northland and bring information of what they would charge and what it would cost to bring it back in house,” he said, adding his timeline is minimal because the assessments need to be done on a timely basis.

“We'll make it through, I just don't like to have this happen,” he said. “I don't want this to happen again.”