DOCSLIB.ORG

Oregon OSCIO, DHS &

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oregon OSCIO, DHS & A Report for Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA ONE IE&ME Project Schedule and Budget Estimation Review, Assessment and Validation 7 February 2018 Engagement: 330045871 This Report, including any supporting materials, is owned by Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates and is for the sole use of the intended Gartner audience or other authorized recipients. This Report may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or otherwise legally protected, and it may not be further copied, distributed or publicly displayed without the express written permission of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. © 2018 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Engagement: 330045871 ONE IE&ME Project Schedule and Budget Estimation Review, Report for Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA Assessment and Validation – Final Report 30 January 2018 — Page i Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background and Lessons Learned ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Schedule and Budget Estimates Assessment Conclusions ....................................... 3 1.3 Strengths and Success Factors ................................................................................. 4 1.4 Pillars of Success and Summary of Key Recommendations ..................................... 5 1.5 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 6 1.6 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................. 7 1.7 Risk Analysis Approach ........................................................................................... 11 2.0 Approach and Methodology ............................................................................... 18 2.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 18 2.2 Assessment Goals ................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Assessment Objectives............................................................................................ 18 3.0 Analysis and Findings ........................................................................................ 20 3.1 ONE IE&ME Project Scope...................................................................................... 20 3.1.1 Description .................................................................................................. 20 3.1.2 Project Scope Strengths ............................................................................. 25 3.1.3 Project Scope Challenges and Potential Risks ........................................... 25 3.2 Reasonableness of Estimation Methodology ........................................................... 28 3.2.1 Estimation for Deloitte DDI ......................................................................... 28 3.2.2 Deloitte DDI Estimation Strengths .............................................................. 28 3.2.3 Deloitte DDI Estimation Challenges and Potential Risks ............................ 29 3.2.4 Estimation for State’s ONE IE&ME Legacy Readiness Activities ............... 29 3.2.5 Legacy Readiness Estimation Strengths .................................................... 32 3.2.6 Legacy Readiness Estimation Challenges and Potential Risks .................. 33 3.3 Reasonableness of Deloitte ONE IE&ME DDI Schedule ......................................... 34 3.3.1 ONE IE&ME Integrated Project Schedule .................................................. 34 3.3.2 Integrated Schedule Strengths ................................................................... 35 3.3.3 Integrated Schedule Challenges and Potential Risks ................................. 35 3.4 Reasonableness of State’s ONE IE&ME Project Support and Legacy Readiness Projects Schedule .................................................................................. 36 3.4.1 Four Phase Legacy Readiness Schedule .................................................. 36 3.4.2 Legacy Readiness Schedule Strengths ...................................................... 37 3.4.3 Legacy Readiness Schedule Challenges and Potential Risks ................... 37 3.4.4 Eligibility Transformation Schedule ............................................................ 38 3.4.5 Eligibility Transformation Schedule Strengths ............................................ 39 3.4.6 Eligibility Transformation Schedule Challenges and Potential Risks .......... 40 © 2018 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Gartner is a trademark of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. For internal use of Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA only. Engagement: 330045871 ONE IE&ME Project Schedule and Budget Estimation Review, Report for Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA Assessment and Validation – Final Report 30 January 2018 — Page ii 3.5 Reasonableness of Deloitte DDI Costs .................................................................... 40 3.5.1 Deloitte DDI Costs Strengths ...................................................................... 41 3.5.2 Deloitte DDI Costs Challenges and Potential Risks ................................... 41 3.6 Reasonableness of State Costs............................................................................... 42 3.6.1 State Costs Strengths ................................................................................. 45 3.6.2 State Costs Challenges and Potential Risks .............................................. 45 3.7 Comparisons with Other States’ Similar Efforts for Consideration ........................... 45 4.0 Prioritized Risks and Mitigation Strategies ....................................................... 47 4.1 Risk Prioritization Approach ..................................................................................... 47 4.2 Process-Related Risks............................................................................................. 48 4.3 People-Related Risks .............................................................................................. 55 4.4 Product-Related Risks ............................................................................................. 59 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................ 63 5.1 Schedule and Budget Estimates Assessment Conclusions ..................................... 63 5.2 Schedule and Budget Estimates Assessment Recommendations .......................... 64 Appendices .................................................................................................................. 66 Appendix A — Listing of Prioritized Risks .......................................................................... 67 Appendix B — Legacy Readiness Scope and Effort .......................................................... 77 Appendix C — Gartner’s Project Approach and Data Discovery ....................................... 91 © 2018 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Gartner is a trademark of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. For internal use of Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA only. Engagement: 330045871 ONE IE&ME Project Schedule and Budget Estimation Review, Report for Oregon OSCIO, DHS & OHA Assessment and Validation – Final Report 30 January 2018 — Page 1 1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Background and Lessons Learned The State of Oregon was one of the early states to start planning for provisions of Affordable Care Act passed in 2010, as summarized below: With the announcement of CMS rules for enhanced funding (90% instead of the usual 50%) for Medicaid related systems and 100% for state-based Health Insurance Exchange (HIX) systems in 2011, the State decided to invest in a state of art solution to initially deploy a Health Insurance Exchange (HIX) with Medicaid MAGI eligibility and enrollment capabilities, and eventually a fully Integrated Eligibility and Enrollment solution for all health and human services benefits for the State In 2012, using the CMS approved Implementation Advanced Planning Document (IAPD) and through a competitive procurement process, Oregon chose to partner with Oracle Professional Services (OPS) to design, configure and deploy a state-based HIX and MAGI solution on top of the Oracle Siebel CRM Public Sector platform Oregon encountered numerous challenges with OPS in successfully configuring, testing and deploying an effective solution by the targeted January 2014 deadline, leading Oregon to eventually terminate its relationship with OPS for further efforts to provide the envisioned new eligibility and enrollment solution for the full continuum of the State’s health and human services programs ONE Integrated Eligibility & Medicaid Eligibility (ONE IE&ME) Project History In 2014, Oregon selected Deloitte to help in conducting a feasibility study for alternative solutions in the market to address the best path forward for eligibility and enrollment beginning with MAGI capabilities. Through market research and site visits, the State chose to leverage the solution built by Deloitte for the Commonwealth of Kentucky for MAGI Medicaid (Kynect) which had already been successfully developed and deployed into production. This was evaluated as the best value way forward for Oregon. Oregon embarked upon a disciplined process for the successful deployment of Kynect for MAGI Eligibility and Enrollment, including the following: Deloitte
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insights from Three States Leading the Way in Preparing for Outreach and Enrollment in the Affordable Care Act
    September 2013 | Issue Brief Getting into Gear for 2014: Insights from Three States Leading the Way in Preparing for Outreach and Enrollment in the Affordable Care Act Summary Fall 2013 will begin to usher in the key health insurance coverage expansions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), with open enrollment in new health insurance Marketplaces (also referred to as Exchanges) beginning on October 1, 2013, and Medicaid expanding to adults in states moving forward with the ACA Medicaid expansion as of January 1, 2014. With open enrollment rapidly approaching, during summer 2013, many states were in high gear to finalize preparations for outreach and enrollment efforts to help translate these new coverage options into increased coverage for millions of currently uninsured individuals. However, states have made different choices with regard to these coverage expansions and there is significant variation across states in their level of preparations for the expansions. This report provides insight into preparations in Maryland, Nevada, and Oregon - three states that have established a State-based Marketplace, are moving forward with the Medicaid expansion, and are among the states leading the way in preparing for outreach and enrollment. It is based on in-person interviews with a range of stakeholders, including state and Marketplace officials, advocates, Navigators and enrollment assisters, providers, and insurance brokers that were conducted during July 2013, as well as review of publicly available information and materials. The findings provide an overview of where these three states are in establishing their Marketplaces; preparing for the Medicaid expansion; planning for marketing, outreach and enrollment; and establishing enrollment assistance resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Barriers and Incremental Steps to Universal Access
    Prepared by Legislative Policy and Research Office Universal Access to Care Work Group Report on Barriers and Incremental Steps to Universal Access December 2018 UNIVERSAL ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE WORK GROUP TO: House Interim Committee on Health Care FROM: Rep. Andrea Salinas, Rep. Barbara Smith Warner, Rep. A. Richard Vial DATE: Dec. 12, 2018 Chair Greenlick, Members of the House Committee on Health Care, and interested parties: As members of the Oregon House of Representatives serving on the Universal Access to Healthcare Work Group, we want to provide some context for the conversations we had in the work group over the past year. The following report will shed light on our research and findings. As a precursor, here are some notable impressions and opinions we determined collectively. We agree that “universal access to care” means better access to care for more people at a lower cost. This must include better quality care and health outcomes than our current health care system delivers. We recognize that our current system is excessively expensive and has not produced results. While some advocates have pushed for a single-payer system as the best answer for curbing costs, reducing administrative waste and fixing other flaws, paying for a universal coverage system presents challenges that are difficult to overcome at this time. The state would need to capture the current taxes many Oregonians pay, as well as the taxes their employers pay for their health care, in order to pay for that system to produce a budget-neutral impact on consumers. Oregon would also need a waiver from the federal government to accomplish this.
    [Show full text]
  • State Health Reform Assistance Network Charting the Road to Coverage
    State Health Reform Assistance Network Charting the Road to Coverage ISSUE BRIEF March 2013 Navigators and In-Person Assistors: ABOUT STATE NETWORK State Health Reform Assistance Network, State Policy and Program Design a program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, provides in-depth technical support to states to maximize coverage gains Considerations as they implement key provisions of the Affordable Care Act. The program is managed Prepared by Shelly Ten Napel and Daniel Eckel, State Health Reform Assistance Network by the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) and related guidance have established Navigators and For more information, visit In-Person Assistors (IPAs) to help individuals enroll in Health Benefit Exchanges www.statenetwork.org. (Exchanges). Several states have begun to make policy and operational decisions about ABOUT THE ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON both Navigator and In-Person Assistor programs that could be informative to other states. FOUNDATION This brief is designed to provide basic information about the Navigator and IPA programs, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation outline important policy issues, and share resources and ideas from leading states. It is part focuses on the pressing health and health care issues facing our country. As the nation’s of a developing series of reports related to consumer assistance and reflects an effort to largest philanthropy devoted exclusively to curate the growing number and depth of resources available to state policymakers on this health and health care, the Foundation works topic. with a diverse group of organizations and individuals to identify solutions and achieve comprehensive, measureable and timely change.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce
    U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE September 25, 2015 TO: Members, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations FROM: Committee Majority Staff RE: Hearing entitled “An Overdue Checkup: Examining the ACA's State Insurance Marketplaces.” On September 29, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations will hold a hearing entitled “An Overdue Checkup: Examining the ACA's State Insurance Marketplaces.” Section 1311 of the Affordable Care Act provided funding assistance to the States to help them establish their own health insurance exchanges. The Federal government granted States at least $5.51 billion toward this effort. By law, the State exchanges were supposed to be self- sustaining—that is, have a funding source other than Federal grant dollars—by January 1, 2015. Despite this multi-billion dollar investment, many are struggling to become self-sustaining. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) alerted the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) that these faltering State exchanges may be using establishment grants to help cover operational costs. With growing maintenance costs and lower than expected enrollment numbers, States are weighing their options, including shutting down their exchanges and migrating to the Federal system. The Subcommittee is conducting oversight to understand the sustainability challenges State exchanges are facing. The hearing also will examine how Federal establishment grant dollars were spent. I. WITNESSES Peter V. Lee, Executive Director, Covered California, State of California; Jim Wadleigh, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, Access Health CT, State of Connecticut; Jeff M.
    [Show full text]
  • September 2016 Marketplace Legislative Report
    Oregon Health Insurance Marketplace Report to the Joint Interim Committee on Ways and Means and Interim Senate and House Committees on Health Care September 2016 Department of Consumer and Business Services 350 Winter St. NE Salem, OR 97309 855-268-3767 www.oregon.gov/dcbs Oregon Health Insurance Marketplace Report Marketplace Report Table of Contents I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 II. Financial Condition ............................................................................................................................... 4 III. Technology Development ................................................................................................................... 10 IV. Coordination with the Oregon Health Authority ................................................................................ 11 V. Program Integration ........................................................................................................................... 12 VI. Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) ................................................................................ 12 VII. Liabilities ............................................................................................................................................. 13 VIII. Federal Agreements ............................................................................................................................ 19 IX. Additional Information
    [Show full text]
  • Health Insurance Exchange Operations Chart
    Health Insurance Exchange Operations Chart *Chart updated June 12, 2015 Allison Wils As states continue to refine the operations of their health insurance exchanges, regardless of the exchange type (state-based exchange, state partnership exchange, or federally facilitated marketplace), it's helpful to compare and contrast operational resources. This chart contains each state's resources and forms for three distinct, and fundamentally important, areas of exchange operation: applications, appeals, and taxes. With links directly to the states' forms and guides related to these issue areas, this chart serves as a one-stop resource library for those interested in developing new, or revising old, versions of applications, appeals, and tax resources. Like all State Refor(u)m research, this chart is a collaborative effort with you, the user. Know of something we should add to this compilation? Your feedback is central to our ongoing, real-time analytical process, so tell us in a comment, or email [email protected] with your suggestions. State Application Forms & Guides Appeal Forms & Guides Tax Guides IRS: Form 1095-A Health Insurance Marketplace Statement IRS: Instructions for Form 1095-A Health Insurance Marketplace Statement IRS: Form 8962 Premium Tax Credit IRS: Form 8965 Health Coverage Federally-Facilitated Marketplaces Healthcare.gov: Appeal Request Exemptions Healthcare.gov: Application for (FFM) & State Partnership Form for Wyoming Marketplace (SPM) States (AK, Health Coverage & Help Paying IRS: Instructions for Form 8965 AL, AR, AZ, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, Costs Healthcare.gov: Appeal Request Health Coverage Exemptions KS, LA, ME, MI, MS, MO, MT, NC, Form for Select States (Group 1) Healthcare.gov: Instructions to IRS: Affordable Care Act Tax ND, NE, NH, NJ, OH, OK, PA, SC, Help You Complete Your Provisions SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, and Healthcare.gov: Appeal Request Application for Health Coverage Form for Select States (Group 2) WY) IRS: Pub.
    [Show full text]
  • Oracle Was Primary Cause of Oregon's Failed Health Insurance
    ORACLE WAS PRIMARY CAUSE OF OREGON’S FAILED HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE WEBSITE Democratic Staff Committee on Oversight and Government Reform U.S. House of Representatives Prepared for Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings May 25, 2016 http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the findings of Democratic staff as part of an investigation by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform into the failure of Oregon’s health insurance exchange website under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Based on the evidence obtained by the Committee, this report makes the following findings: (1) Oregon’s contractor, the Oracle Corporation, was primarily and directly responsible for the failure of the State’s health insurance exchange website. (2) Oracle failed to deliver a fully functioning website by the October 1, 2013, deadline, or any time thereafter. (3) Oracle misled state officials by repeatedly assuring them its work was on track and on schedule when in fact it was riddled with errors. (4) Oracle’s own officials conceded internally that their work was embarrassingly deficient. (5) Independent experts concluded that Oracle’s work was so deficient that the State should consider withholding payment. (6) The decision to finally abandon Oracle’s website was based on the fact that it was less expensive and less risky to switch to the federal technology than to repair Oracle’s defective technology. The Republican staff of the Committee issued their own report today, attempting to shift blame for Oracle’s massive failures onto the state and federal governments. However, their report ignores basic facts, disregards Oracle’s numerous failures, and downplays or entirely omits key evidence that contradicts their narrative.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Into Gear for 2014: an Early Look at Branding and Marketing of New Health Insurance Marketplaces
    September 2013 | Issue Brief Getting into Gear for 2014: An Early Look at Branding and Marketing of New Health Insurance Marketplaces As of September 2013, states and the federal government are on the eve of their October 1st launch of open enrollment for the new Health Insurance Marketplaces, where consumers will be able to shop for and purchase private coverage and potentially receive subsidies to lower the cost of that coverage. Achieving adequate enrollment through these Marketplaces will be important for fulfilling the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) goal of reducing the nation’s uninsured rate. Moreover, sufficient enrollment, particularly among young and healthy individuals, will be important for ensuring the financial sustainability of the Marketplaces over time. Recognizing the importance of enrollment, the federal government and the 17 states operating State-based Marketplaces have invested resources and conducted extensive consumer research to inform the branding and marketing campaigns for their Marketplaces. Based on a review of publicly available materials as of September 2013, this brief provides an examination of the Marketplace branding strategies, websites, and marketing materials, providing insight into how consumers will be introduced to the Marketplaces and some of the key messages and approaches the Marketplaces will utilize to encourage individuals to enroll. BACKGROUND The ACA seeks to reduce the number of uninsured through two key coverage expansions: the creation of new Health Insurance Marketplaces and an expansion in Medicaid eligibility. The Health Insurance Marketplaces will provide consumers with a choice of qualified health plans, offering similar benefits, so they can select the one that best meets their needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Insurance Today, at Sixty-Five, and in Retirement
    The Oregon Attorney Assistance Program presents Health Insurance Today, At Sixty-Five, and in Retirement Steven Doty AKT Benefit Advisors Elma Friend Willamette Valley Benefits, Inc. Mary Osborn Master Care Solutions Mike Long OAAP Attorney Counselor September 28, 2016 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Oregon Bar Center Tigard, Oregon Qualifies for 3.5 Personal Management Assistance MCLE Credits Contents Contents ….............................................................................................. 1 MCLE1 Form ........................................................................................... 2 Today’s Agenda .................................................................................... 3 Presenter Biographies .......................................................................... 4 Steven Doty: Health Insurance Overview ……………………………………… 5-12 Multnomah Bar Association Providence Plan ...................................... 13 Multnomah Bar Association Kaiser Plan .............................................. 14 Multnomah Bar Association Dental/Vision Plans ……………………………… 15 Elma Friend: Medicare and Medi-Gap Insurance Policies .…………… 16-21 Mary Osborn: Long-Term Care Insurance .……………..…………………… 22-31 Oregon’s Long-Term Care Qualified Partnership Program …………………. 32 CLTC One Page 2016 Tax Summary ……………………….………………………….. 33 1 MCLE FORM 1: Recordkeeping Form (Do Not Return This Form to the Bar) Instructions: Pursuant to MCLE Rule 7.2, every active member shall maintain records of participation in accredited CLE activities. You
    [Show full text]
  • State Health Reform Assistance Network Charting the Road to Coverage
    State Health Reform Assistance Network Charting the Road to Coverage ISSUE BRIEF February 2013 Designing Consumer Assistance ABOUT STATE NETWORK State Health Reform Assistance Network, Programs: Resources from the Field a program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, provides in-depth technical support to states to maximize coverage gains Prepared by Katie Baudouin, Christina Miller, and Rachel Dolan, National Academy for State as they implement key provisions of the Health Policy Affordable Care Act. The program is managed by the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and Introduction International Affairs at Princeton University. For more information, visit The implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) presents opportunities for Medicaid, www.statenetwork.org. the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and soon-to-be-established Health ABOUT NASHP Benefits Exchanges to improve their efforts to provide consumer assistance. The The National Academy for State Health Policy Congressional Budget Office estimates that seven million Americans will enroll in Medicaid (NASHP) is an independent academy of state and CHIP, mostly adults under 65, and nine million more will enroll in commercial insurance health policymakers dedicated to helping states achieve excellence in health policy through the Exchanges in 2014 when the new ACA coverage expansion provisions will be in and practice. A non-profit and nonpartisan place. It is expected that enrollment will increase over time as more of the population organization, NASHP provides a forum for becomes familiar with and knowledgeable about these new coverage opportunities. constructive work across branches and Additionally, states can expect shifts in enrollment of children between Medicaid and CHIP agencies of state government on critical health issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Gao-17-258, Health Insurance Marketplaces
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters August 2017 HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACES CMS Needs to Improve Its Oversight of State IT Systems’ Sustainability and Performance GAO-17-258 August 2017 HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACES CMS Needs to Improve Its Oversight of State IT Systems' Sustainability and Performance Highlights of GAO-17-258, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The Patient Protection and Affordable The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Care Act required the establishment of Medicaid Services (CMS) has offered assistance through providing periodic health insurance exchanges—or oversight and issuing regulation and guidance to states transitioning from state- marketplaces—to allow consumers to based marketplaces to the federally based marketplace IT platform, including compare, select, and purchase health two states that GAO reviewed—Hawaii and Oregon—that had made that insurance plans. States can elect to establish a state-based marketplace, or transition. While CMS provided these states with assistance, documented CMS cede this authority to CMS to establish a transition guidance was not finalized until after the two states had completed federally facilitated marketplace. Some their transition. The two states incurred costs of approximately $84.3 million, states had difficulties with the rollout and collectively, to transition to the federal platform. The two states’ transition efforts operation of their marketplaces, and included making changes to their Medicaid systems, with these states mainly some states that struggled with IT relying on Medicaid matching funds from CMS to do this. While the selected implementation are now using the federal states successfully transitioned, they encountered challenges during their marketplace IT platform.
    [Show full text]
  • Skt Sigma Kappa Triangle Vol 6
    IGMA .11....- Ore_gon State University Memorial Union, Corvallis, Ore. Center of Student Activities ~rna Kappa's at Marshall waiting impatiently on ! front porch for the Kappa Alpha's to come th their 20 plus bids to Old South. April, 1969. Epsilon Eta's chat with the rushees over an old fashioned box·lunch at Findlay. Prize·winning float of Delta Chi chapter. Won first prize in the annual homecoming parade. House decoration also won first prize. psilon Alpha won first place in the Homecoming ttdoor display competition at Lenoir Rhyne. Alpha Lambda's second place Adelphi Homecoming float: )ee Enis, ~P, with one of the children at our "Happy Birthday to Garden City on its centennial." Welfare Christmas Party at Madison. VOLUME 64 SPRING 1970 NUMBER 1 Official Magazine of Sigma Kappa Sorority Founded at Colby College, November, 1874 FRANCES WARREN BAKER, Editor NATIONAL COUNCIL National President-Mrs. Gordon 3 Convention Anyone? Say YES! Duncan, 6416 Garland, Fort Worth, Tex. 76116 5 Let's Join the Fun Set- in Sunny Sarasota 1st Vice Presidtnt-Mrs. Walton Dismukes, 1530 Escobita ave., Palo 8 All "A" Sigma Scholars 1968-69 Alto, Calif. 94306 9 1874-Mission Centennial-1974 2nd Viet Prnident-Mrs. W. P. Haddon, 698 Parsippany blvd., 10 Sororities and Socialism Boonton, N.J. 07005 15 Sigma Kappa's "Underground" Member National Director of Membership­ Mrs. Leslie Collins, 8636 Fountlee 16 Alumnre Gather in Maryland Crest SW, Seattle, Wash. 98116 National Director of Extension­ 19 Sue Smith Is a Special-Sigma Mrs. Patricia Carlin Smith, 511 Malvern Hill circle, Hampton, Va.
    [Show full text]