Podcast appearances and mentions of Case management

In this episode, BESLER Sr. Mgr. Meliza Weiner, gives a glimpse into BESLER's next Webinar, The Evolving Role of Case Management, live on May 7, 1 PM ET. 

Brett Shavers joins the Forensic Focus Podcast to discuss the critical "investigative mindset" needed for effective digital forensics. Drawing from his unique background in undercover law enforcement operations and his transition to digital forensics, Brett shares invaluable insights on why technical skills alone aren't enough in DFIR. Digging into practical challenges with hosts Si and Desi, Brett tackles head-on why DFIR isn't an entry-level field, the importance of understanding human behavior behind digital evidence, and how to approach cases with both technical precision and investigative strategy. He discusses his journey authoring several influential books including "DFIR Investigative Mindset," "Placing the Suspect Behind the Keyboard," and the definitive guide to X-Ways Forensics. Whether you're a seasoned investigator or considering a career in digital forensics, Brett offers practical wisdom on balancing technical proficiency with investigative thinking, effective communication of complex findings, and why we should remember we're not investigating computers—we're investigating people who use computers. #digitalforensics #dfir 00:00 Introduction and Guest Welcome 02:01 Brett Shavers' Background in Law Enforcement 03:33 Transition to Forensics 05:03 Challenges in DFIR 07:17 Educational Pathways and Industry Insights 12:51 X-Ways Forensics and Tool Proficiency 16:58 Investigative Mindset and New Book 27:46 The Importance of Education in Cybersecurity 28:04 Challenges in Teaching Investigative Skills 28:59 Real-World Training Scenarios 30:38 Understanding the Human Element in Cybersecurity 35:35 The Role of Communication in Cybersecurity 42:59 Technical Proficiency and Case Management 47:32 Continuous Improvement and Collaboration 53:42 Conclusion and Final Thoughts Show Notes Brett's Ramblings - https://www.brettshavers.com/ DFIR Training - https://www.dfir.training/ Brett's Books - https://brettshavers.com/my-books  

If you are new here be sure to grab my free e-course to learn more about what macro social work is: ⁠⁠⁠https://macroandpaid.com/

In this episode of CB Up for Discussion, we are joined by Penny Barsha, Asia Head of Corporate Responsibility at Linklaters, and Rachel Li, Head of Case Management and Research at HELP for Domestic Workers. Together, they share their inspiring collaboration on the HELPline program, an initiative that provides emergency support, shelter, and comprehensive assistance to migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong. Throughout the episode, we explore several key areas: • Penny and Rachel discuss the inception of HELPline and how the partnership between Linklaters and HELP has evolved over the years to address the critical needs of migrant domestic workers. • We learn about the challenges faced by migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong, including employment disputes, debt cycles, immigration issues, and access to healthcare. • The tangible impacts of HELPline are highlighted through inspiring stories of transformation, such as Lillian's journey from exploitation to becoming a community leader. • The importance of corporate partnerships with grassroots organizations is emphasized, with advice on how businesses can create meaningful CSR initiatives that align with community needs. • Penny and Rachel share their thoughts on empathy and curiosity as essential tools for creating lasting change in society. Join us for an enlightening conversation about how corporates and NGOs can work together to empower marginalized communities and make a ripple of change across society. Tune in now!

Is your healthcare tech solution experiencing high initial adoption but then watching patients drop off? Discover why 70% of remote monitoring platforms fail after enrollment, and learn the critical case management component that could save your $2M+ company from becoming another statistic.In this episode of Health Tech Growth, we dive deep into the "first date" phenomenon in healthcare technology - that exciting initial user engagement that quickly fades without proper clinical integration. Our expert guests reveal the missing link between technological innovation and sustainable patient adoption.What you'll learn:

How do organizations transform isolated security measures into comprehensive insider risk programs? Bert Oliveira, Head of Physical Security and Investigations at Citizens Financial Group, shares 30+ years of insights on tackling insider risk and financial crimes in the evolving landscape of corporate security. Discover how partnerships, proactive forensics, and a strong security culture drive resilience and safeguard businesses against internal and external threats.You'll learn:How insider threats have shifted from targeting malicious actors to mitigating negligence and third-party risksThe role of digital forensics in building a secure foundation for identifying insider riskKey leadership advice for fostering collaboration and shared responsibility in security programsLearn more about Ontic's Incidents, Investigations, and Case Management.

LENDERS, FORWARDERS, AND CAR REPO AGENCIES NEED A ROBUST SOFTWARE SYSTEM THAT HELPS THEM CONNECT WITH CLIENT CASE MANAGEMENT, PERFORM ALL SERVICES, AND ACCOMMODATE THEIR UNIQUE BUSINESS WORKFLOW. The solution is MBSi. This is Automotive Ecosystem on ATI.

Send us a textHomelessness Resolution Case Managers Alex Williams and Hudson Janz share information about their work with the unhoused population in Arvada. In this episode:How the case management process worksUnderstanding the Point-In-Time countSharing City-run and other local resourcesThe day-to-day work and recent success storiesCold weather resources and other challenges facing the unhoused populationNews & eventsCity Manager search to recruit additional candidatesCity recertified as Silver-level Bicycle Friendly CommunityRalston Creek Trail section closed for flood risk mitigation projectLake Arbor Master Plan open house from 4 - 6 pm on Thursday, Feb. 20Winterfest, the City's multicultural winter celebration, is Saturday, Feb. 22 from 11am - 4pm in Olde TownVisit us at ArvadaCO.gov/Podcast or email us at podcast@arvada.org.

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

How to Achieve a 50%+ Bankruptcy Client Conversion Rate Across an Entire State | Episode 69 | Unbundled Attorney MastermindThis is a live Fireside Chat interview with bankruptcy attorney Max Rosenberg and his wife Osi. A Fireside Chat is a interview and Q and A session that is hosted live as a community event for our Unbundled Attorney network.  During this interview Max and Osi share strategies for converting bankruptcy leads and managing a successful statewide bankruptcy practice.  Max discusses his approach to achieving a 50%+ conversion rate while serving the entire state of Connecticut.  Max shares how technology, client relationships, and flexible payment plans all play a role in his success.They also discuss the specific enrollment process, service options, payment plans, and strategies that enable Max to seamlessly enroll clients electronically, and deliver services from his virtual office, usually without ever meeting them in person.Click here to watch the video version of this interview on YouTubeIn this episode, you'll learn:How he is able to seamlessly enroll and intake new clients electronically across the entire state of ConnecticutHow using a client-centered approach by being creative with service and payment options enables him to retain 2-3 new clients out of every 5 leadsHow he leverages legal technology to streamline much of the document preparation, payment collection, and processes in his firmAnd much more...If you enjoy this podcast, please head over to iTunes, subscribe to the show, and leave us a review. We love hearing from our listeners and look forward to reading your feedback! For more information about Unbundled Attorney and how our exclusive, unbundled leads can help grow your practice, visit: https://www.unbundledattorney.com

This week's educational episode showcases the incredible work of Semper Fi and America's Fund, an organization that has been providing vital support to service members, veterans, and their families for over 20 years. At the heart of this organization is Sondria Saylor, the Executive Vice President, whose personal connection to the military community runs deep.Sondria's connection to the military began in 1984 when she became an active-duty spouse. In 2003, she saw the challenges faced by wounded service members returning from Iraq and knew action was needed. Along with other military spouses, Sondria met medevacs at the hospital, providing essentials and comfort to these brave individuals. This grassroots effort grew into the Semper Fi and America's Fund, which has provided over $500 million in support and programs to 33,000 service members across all branches of the U.S. armed forces.Sondria's dedication to the mission of Semper Fi and America's Fund is truly inspiring. Through comprehensive case management and lifetime support, she and her team ensure that service members, caregivers, and their families receive the care and resources needed to navigate recovery and reintegration. Semper Fi and America's Fund serves as a beacon of hope and community for those who have sacrificed for our country, offering caregiver retreats, sports programs, and holiday celebrations.About Sondria:Sondria is the Executive Vice President of Semper Fi & America's Fund, where she oversees Case Management for the Western Region, Communications Operations, and the Apprenticeship, Jinx McCain Horsemanship, and Veteran to Veteran (V2V) Programs.Before her current role, Sondria was Vice President of Case Management in the Western Region from 2014 to 2021, Senior Director of Case Management from 2005 to 2014, and Director of Donor Operations from 2004 to 2005.Sondria's connection to the military began in 1984 when she became an active-duty spouse. From its early years in the 1980s until 2004, she was involved in the evolution of Marine Corps Family Readiness, serving as Key Volunteer Advisor to the 1st Marine Division.As Key Volunteer Advisor in 2003, she worked alongside Karen Guenther to support returning wounded at the Naval Hospital at Camp Pendleton, which led to the creation of Semper Fi & America's Fund.Sondria's contributions to Family Readiness earned her induction into the US Field Artillery Honorable Order of Molly Pitcher in 1993. In 2007, her work with Semper Fi & America's Fund was recognized by Cookie Magazine with the 1st Annual Smart Cookie Award, honoring women making a difference.Raised and educated in Fairfax, VA, Sondria has extensive experience in small business ownership and management. She has been married to her husband Ben, a retired Marine Colonel, for 38 years, and they have two adult sons.Support the showConfessions of a Reluctant Caregiver Sisterhood of Care, LLC Website: www.confessionsofareluctantcaregiver.com Like us on Facebook! Tweet with us on Twitter! Follow us on Instagram! Watch us on Youtube! Pin us on Pinterest! Link us on LinkedIn!Tune in on Whole Care Network

Fred Burton speaks with Robin Welch-Stearns about understanding the true extent of insider risk for modern corporate security teams. Robin shares her insights from her time at the CIA and Google, highlighting the differences between insider risk in public and private sectors. She discusses the importance of creating a comprehensive approach to managing insider threats by understanding the motivations behind them, using data analytics, and fostering collaboration between cybersecurity and physical security teams. You'll learn: Differences in insider risks between public and private sectors, and common forms these risks take within organizations Strategies and frameworks for detecting and preventing insider threats, emphasizing data analytics and employee training Psychological factors and motivations behind insider threats, and the opportunities and challenges AI presents in managing these risks Learn more about Ontic's Incidents, Investigations, and Case Management.

They interview individuals to assess their needs. They help them locate housing. They direct them toward helpful resources and programs. They encourage. They support. They nurture. They are case managers, and they provide invaluable help to those who are hungry and homeless in our area. Traci Hefner, Director of Case Management for the ChattFoundation, discussed two critical programs she oversees: Permanent Supportive Housing and Eviction Prevention programs. Find out how you can make a difference in the lives of vulnerable individuals at www.chattfoundation.org. Support the show: http://moodyradio.org/donateto/morningshow/wmbwSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mike Smith explores the intricate balance between safeguarding personal privacy and ensuring robust security measures within organizations. His discussion with Fred covers the strategies for developing an effective insider risk program that both anticipates threats and respects individual rights. Through expert insights and real-world examples, you'll gain a comprehensive understanding of how to navigate this delicate yet crucial terrain.You'll learn:Key strategies for balancing privacy concerns with security needsThe components that make an insider risk program effectiveHow to implement ethical practices that protect both the organization and its individualsLearn more about Ontic's Incidents, Investigations, and Case Management.

In this episode, Manish dives into the dynamic world of corporate security through the firsthand experiences of Honeywell's seasoned professionals, Mike Pierce and Kevin Renwick, transitioning from law enforcement. Their conversation emphasizes the critical role of relationship-building in mitigating insider risks while highlighting innovative strategies for breaking down organizational silos. Listen in to gain perspectives on navigating the balance between employee privacy and organizational safety through comprehensive investigative practices.What you'll learn:Innovative strategies for identifying and mitigating insider risksStrategies for dismantling silos and enhancing collaborationHow to balance investigative rigor with trust and privacyLearn more about Ontic's Incidents, Investigations, and Case Management.

What does it take to build an efficient homelessness response system? What next steps are needed to address the affordability crisis and implement solutions? Does society have the tools necessary to end homelessness in Nashville and nationwide?In My Place educates listeners on what cities like Nashville can do to prevent and end homelessness — while caring for our neighbors who are still unhoused. We talk to national and local guests about everything from best practices to worst failures and hear from people who intimately know the complexities of having nowhere to go. This show highlights how affordable housing affects each of us even if we think it doesn't.This series was created thanks in part to support from Pinnacle Financial Partners and was produced by Judy Tackett and Tasha A.F. Lemley.Today's guests:Ann Oliva | CEO, National Alliance to End HomelessnessBrain Haile | CEO, Neighborhood HealthShawn Lesley | Vendor, The ContributorJamie Berry | Chief of Staff, Metropolitan Development and Housing AuthorityDeirdre Nicole Childress | Guest Commentator; Director of Communications, Director of Trauma Services, Director of Case Management, Gideon's ArmyFurther in:• Overview Episode of In My Place• Episode 1: Homelessness Facts and Faces• Episode 2: Housing First• Episode 3: Housing Strategies• Episode 4: The interconnectedness of health care, housing and homelessness• Episode 5: Upstream homelessness prevention• Episode 6: Hidden Homelessness• Episode 7: Permanent supportive housing• Episode 8: The Impact of Homelessness on Residents and Business Owners

I'm swapping podcast episodes this week with Kati Kleber from FreshRN and I could not be more excited about what she is sharing with you! In this mega episode, which aired originally on the FreshRN podcast, Kati shares a bounty of communication tips that you'll find helpful whether you're brand new or a seasoned nurse with years of experience at the bedside. This episode includes: How to talk to your nursing colleagues, CNAs, and medical unit receptionists when your urgency level changes or you have challenges working together Learning what everyone on the healthcare team actually wants to know when they need a patient update (PT, OT, ST, Case Management, Social Work, medical team, and more!) Cool vs. not cool ways to handle things  Simple things you can do and say to look and feel more comfortable as the patient's nurse Tips on delivering tough news and how to be in those big moments while holding it together and being a strong but caring presence for your patient How to engage with your own family and loved ones who might not understand all that you go through at a normal day of work If you love this episode and love hearing from Kati (who is awesome, by the way!), then you'll probably want to know where to hang out with her online. For ALL of FreshRN's new nurse content, click here. For a free mini-course on report tips for new nurses (including Kati's fave report sheet), click here:  For Kati's free cardiac assessment checklist, click here. For Kat's most-used medical abbreviations, click here. Learn more about the FreshRN All-Access Pass here Get weekly tips, encouragement, stories from the bedside, and more - just for nursing students and new nurses at: https://www.freshrn.com/email-sign-up/  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FreshRN Twitter: https://twitter.com/Kati_Kleber Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/Fresh_RN/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kati_kleber/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@freshrn Music credit: Keep My Cool by Benj Heard ___________________ The information, including but not limited to, audio, video, text, and graphics contained on this podcast are for educational purposes only. No content on this podcast is intended to guide nursing practice and does not supersede any individual healthcare provider's scope of practice or any nursing school curriculum. Additionally, no content on this podcast is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Straight a Nursing is a proud member of the Airwave Media Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Planning ahead for workplace incidents is an essential task for any business. Despite safety rules and risk reduction, getting injured on the job is still a possibility. Emotions run high in the immediate aftermath of an injury. Learn how to put a plan of care in place ahead of time with Lyndi Barthel, Manager of Medical Services and Case Management at MEM.

In this episode, host Chuck Randolph speaks with Ian Johnson, Threat Manager on the Coinbase Protective Intelligence team, about the evolving landscape of security in the FinTech industry. They discuss Ian's career path, the challenges and opportunities in managing life safety threats, and how technology and AI are transforming investigative processes in corporate security.Tune in to hear them discuss:Ian's unconventional career path in private security and FinTechThe role of AI and technology in modern security operationsStrategies for creating effective and adaptable investigative programsLearn more about Ontic's Incidents, Investigations, and Case Management.Have a question for our hosts? Or want to be on the podcast? Email us at podcast@ontic.co.

Hi, Spring fans! In this installment I catch up with my friend Joram Barrez, cofounder of Flowable, an amazing and opensource workflow engine, on their latest and greatest, AI, Spring, and so much more. #workflow #bpmn #apache2 #springboot #java

Episode 228 :     Welcome to this week's episode of PI-perspectives. Today we take a look at one of our new sponsors, Track-Ops case management software. We welcome Ian Ricketson to the program and he breaks down some myths about case management and why you need to have a dependable system in place to be a successful investigator. Let's jump in with the guys and get right to it. Please welcome Ian Ricketson and private investigator, Matt Spaier  Links:      Matt's email: MatthewS@Satellitepi.com   Linkedin: Matthew Spaier       www.investigators-toolbox.com   Ian on Linkedin: Ian Ricketson 
 PI-Perspectives Youtube link:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYB3MaUg8k5w3k7UuvT6s0g Sponsors:     https://piinstitute.com/ https://pi-perspectivesinsurance.com/ https://www.trackops.com/ https://www.skopenow.com https://researchfpr.com/ FBI Tip Line https://tips.fbi.gov/home https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/newyork/about - (212) 384-1000

This is a replay version of an episode originally published in January 2022. Please note that any law discussed in the episode may be out of date.In this episode, you'll learn how to prepare for and run a case management hearing in the employment tribunal, including:-Why you should follow Isaac Asimov's three laws of roboticsThe unknown knownsHow to be a hero in front of the judge.Daniel discusses the topic with Michael Salter from 42 Bedford Row.This podcast  is supported by Watson Ramsbotton Solicitors and by Cover Clinic, and by the HR Inner Circle (the UK's leading community for smart, ambitious HR Professionals)

A specialist lawyer says the ACC was warned its $74 million case management restructure would fail and is pleased to hear a back-tracking is under way. Co-convenor of the ACC Futures Coalition group, campaigning to improve ACC, lawyer Hazel Armstrong spoke to Corin Dann.

In this episode of The JDE Connection, hosts Chandra and Paul explore the functionalities and capabilities within the JD Edwards Customer Relationship Management (CRM) and Health and Safety modules. As part of their ongoing series exploring JDE feature functionality, the provide an overview of the key components Case Management, Service Management and Health and Safety Management. 03:07 Customer Relationship Management Overview 04:13 Case Management 08:47 Service Management 13:33 Health and Safety 18:00 Midwesternism of the Day

In this podcast episode, we're diving into the latest tools and trends that are revolutionizing public safety. Join us as we chat with some of the brightest minds in the field, exploring how advanced case management systems are driving faster response times and smarter decision-making. We'll also look at real-world examples of cutting-edge tech, like AI and real-time data, that are helping public safety teams work more efficiently and keep our communities safer.

Today I have the pleasure of welcoming our guest Lorraine Whyte to Fulfillment in Faith podcast. Lorraine Whyte, a Canadian nurse living in the U.S., shared her journey from Toronto to North Carolina, detailing her experiences with lateral violence in nursing. She highlighted the challenges faced by travel nurses, including being given high-acuity patients and being treated differently. Lorraine recounted a devastating experience where she lost her job after maternity leave, despite her dedication and leadership roles. This incident led her to pursue coaching and public speaking, focusing on leadership and creating a healthy work environment. She co-authored three books and is developing coaching programs, emphasizing the importance of knowing one's rights and reporting unacceptable behavior.About Lorraine Whyte:My name is Lorraine Elise Stewart Whyte. I hold a master's degree in nursing with a focus on Executive Leadership from Purdue Global University. Additionally, I am a Certified Life Coach, having completed my certification at AB Fire Speaking and Coaching Academy. I am also a best-selling co-author of "The Queendom Code of Conduct: 12 Laws of Women in Leadership" and "Fire Code of Conduct: 12 Laws to Living Her Life on Fire," both a book and workbook. Currently, I work as a Utilization Review Nurse in Case Management. Throughout my nursing career, I have gained experience in various areas, encountering both exceptional and lacking leadership skills among leaders. As a Leadership Coach, I am dedicated to empowering individuals to achieve their fullest potential as leaders. I aspire to set an example for children and others, aiming to make a positive impact on lives globally.Lorraine.Whyte@hotmail.comhttps://www.iamcoachle.comhttps://www.facebook.com/QueenEWhyteCONNECT WITH SHANNAN MONDOR:Website: https://shannanmondor.comPodcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/fulfillment-in-faith/id1653165886Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/shannankmondor/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/shannanmondorTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@shannanmondorYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6Xe944cXwD-HFPFQnwnRcQBook: https://www.amazon.ca/How-Hell-Did-Get-Here/dp/0228871220Email- info@shannanmondor.com When you have faith in yourself you will have fulfilment in all areas of your life!See you next week and blessing to all!!!

For the eighth episode of our special series with ProfitSolv, we talk about how law firms can switch into new case management software, alongside ProfitSolv's Joyce Brafford & Beyond Square One's Donna Brown. (It's not impossible!) [SPONSORED BY COSMOLEX] Episode Highlights 05:50 - Introducing cryptid corner: intriguing and fun. 07:45 - Donna's pick: Oklahoma octopus legend. 13:10 - Jared's clue for software trouble: frustration triggers. 13:52 - Reason for frustration: pricey, slow, ineffective software. 16:20 - Role of consultants in smooth transitions. 20:40 - Indicators for needing new software. 23:15 - Consulting specialists ease transitions. 25:39 - Importance of testing and transparency in software rollout. 31:30 - Unified firm involvement for better buy-in. 38:39 - Relevant software integrations matter.   Episode Resources Connect with Jared Correia jared@redcavelegal.com https://redcavelegal.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaredcorreia https://twitter.com/RedCaveLegal www.linkedin.com/in/jaredcorreia/ Connect with Joyce Brafford and Donna Brown joyce.brafford@profitsolv.com dbrown@beyondsquareone.com https://www.profitsolv.com/ https://www.cosmolex.com/ http://beyondsquareone.com/  

Abortion is a polarizing issue. But whatever your opinion, if you're a Floridian voting this November, you'll have a say in whether the right to an abortion is written into the state constitution. Like voters in 11 other states this fall, Floridians will have the chance to vote on abortion access - in this case through a constitutional amendment. But since May, Floridians seeking an abortion have faced an added hurdle as have medical practices and groups that support people who are seeking abortions Today, the procedure is banned beyond the sixth week of pregnancy with some rare exceptions. That's after the Florida Legislature replaced a 15 week ban that had been in place since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022. Florida Matters created space for conversations on both sides of this controversial issue. In a special program recorded live at at WUSF in Tampa, you'll hear the background to the proposed amendment and how it could roll back Florida's current ban on abortions. During the conversation you'll hear from Kathryn Varn, Tampa Bay Reporter with Axios; Bree Wallace, Director of Case Management, Tampa Bay Abortion Fund; John Stemberger, President & Senior Counsel, Liberty Counsel Action; and Louis Virelli, Lawyer & Constitutional Law Professor, Stetson University College of Law.

Abortion is a polarizing issue. But whatever your opinion, if you're a Floridian voting this November, you'll have a say in whether the right to an abortion is written into the state constitution. Like voters in 11 other states this fall, Floridians will have the chance to vote on abortion access - in this case through a constitutional amendment. But since May, Floridians seeking an abortion have faced an added hurdle as have medical practices and groups that support people who are seeking abortions Today, the procedure is banned beyond the sixth week of pregnancy with some rare exceptions. That's after the Florida Legislature replaced a 15 week ban that had been in place since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022. Florida Matters created space for conversations on both sides of this controversial issue. In a special program recorded live at at WUSF in Tampa, you'll hear the background to the proposed amendment and how it could roll back Florida's current ban on abortions. During the conversation you'll hear from Kathryn Varn, Tampa Bay Reporter with Axios; Bree Wallace, Director of Case Management, Tampa Bay Abortion Fund; John Stemberger, President & Senior Counsel, Liberty Counsel Action; and Louis Virelli, Lawyer & Constitutional Law Professor, Stetson University College of Law.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:Toward Fairer, Quicker, Cheaper Litigation: A Unified Theory of Civil Case Management (Judicature)Civil Justice Initiative Implementation Tools (National Center for State Courts)Why Don't Judges Case Manage? (University of Miami Law Review) ABOUT THE HOSTJudge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

Drowning in deadlines? Buried in emails? Juggling countless files? If this sounds all too familiar, you're not alone. In this episode, we dive deep into the tech solutions revolutionizing law firm management. Our guest, Ryan Anderson, co-founder of FileVine, shares his journey from overwhelmed attorney to tech innovator. Discover how his firsthand experience with the chaos of legal practice led to the creation of an AI-powered platform - File Vine. Now trusted by over 3,500 law firms, they process an incredible 208 cases per hour. Learn how AI can transform your practice. From automated demand letters to streamlined legal research, we explore cutting-edge tools that are redefining efficiency in the legal world. Whether you're a solo practitioner or managing a large firm, this episode is packed with insights to boost your productivity, enhance accuracy, and, ultimately, drive profitability. Get your PIMCON Ticket Today! Links Want to hear more from elite personal injury lawyers and industry-leading marketers? Follow us on social media for more. Rankings.io Instagram Chris Dreyer Instagram Rankings.io Twitter Rankings.io Website Ryan Anderson LinkedIn File Vine Website What's in This Episode: Who is Ryan Anderson? How AI-powered document management can revolutionize case organization and information retrieval, saving attorneys countless hours and reducing errors. Strategies for implementing data-driven performance management in law firms, using metrics to optimize operations and improve profitability. The importance of centralized communication systems in law firms and how they can enhance collaboration, reduce miscommunication, and improve client service. Past Guests Past guests on Personal Injury Mastermind: Brent Sibley, Sam Glover, Larry Nussbaum, Michael Mogill, Brian Chase, Jay Kelley, Alvaro Arauz, Eric Chaffin, Brian Panish, John Gomez, Sol Weiss, Matthew Dolman, Gabriel Levin, Seth Godin, David Craig, Pete Strom, John Ruhlin, Andrew Finkelstein, Harry Morton, Shay Rowbottom, Maria Monroy, Dave Thomas, Marc Anidjar, Bob Simon, Seth Price, John Gomez, Megan Hargroder, Brandon Yosha, Mike Mandell, Brett Sachs, Paul Faust, Jennifer Gore-Cuthbert Additional Episodes You Might Enjoy 80. Mike Papantonio, Levin, Papantonio, & Rafferty — Doing Well by Doing Good 84. Glen Lerner, Lerner and Rowe – A Steady Hand in a Shifting Industry 101. Pratik Shah, EsquireTek — Discovering the Power of Automation 134. Darryl Isaacs, Isaacs & Isaacs — The Hammer: Insights from a Marketing Legend 104. Taly Goody, Goody Law Group — Finding PI Clients on TikTok 63. Joe Fried, Fried Goldberg LLC — How To Become An Expert And Revolutionize Your PI Niche 96. Brian Dean, Backlinko — Becoming a Linkable Source 83. Seth Godin — Differentiation: How to Make Your Law Firm a Purple Cow 73. Neil Patel, Neil Patel — Digital A New Approach to Content and Emerging Marketing Channels

This Day in Legal History: Province of Canada CreatedOn July 23, 1840, the British Parliament passed the Act of Union, a pivotal piece of legislation that led to the creation of the Province of Canada. This act merged the colonies of Upper Canada (present-day Ontario) and Lower Canada (present-day Quebec) into a single entity. The Act of Union was a response to the political unrest and demands for reform that had been growing in both colonies, particularly after the Rebellions of 1837-1838.The Act of Union aimed to unify the administrative structures of the two colonies, addressing inefficiencies and fostering a more cohesive government. It established a single legislative assembly, with equal representation from both regions, despite significant differences in their populations and cultural backgrounds. This structure was intended to assimilate the French-speaking population of Lower Canada into the English-speaking majority of Upper Canada, though it often led to tension and conflict.Taking effect on February 10, 1841, the Act marked the beginning of a new political era in Canadian history, laying foundational governance structures that would influence future developments leading up to Canadian Confederation in 1867. The Province of Canada would eventually split into the separate provinces of Ontario and Quebec, but the Act of Union remains a significant moment in the evolution of Canada's political landscape.The Ninth Circuit's updated case management system is being used as a model for the federal judiciary's administrative office to modernize its electronic filing program, according to Chief Judge Mary Murguia. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is collaborating with the Administrative Office of the US Courts to replace the CM/ECF system with a new cloud-based system by the end of 2025. This modernization effort aims to enhance the efficiency of filing legal documents and accessing case information.Since October, the Ninth Circuit has processed all new cases through its Appellate Case Management System, with older reopened cases still using the previous system. This development was a joint effort with the Second Circuit. Judge Murguia noted a significant decline in case filings over the past five years, with the Ninth Circuit now having fewer than 7,000 pending cases—a 23% reduction from 2019 and the lowest number in decades.Ninth Circuit's Case Filing System Used as Model for JudiciaryA New York appellate judge has affirmed that individuals who file complaints against attorneys in disciplinary cases have a First Amendment right to attend related hearings, view pertinent documents, and access some final decisions. This ruling emphasizes the importance of public scrutiny in holding judges accountable, particularly those serving fourteen-year terms appointed by elected governors. The decision, issued by Judge Victor Marrero of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, specifically impacts the New York Supreme Court's Second Appellate Department, which disciplines attorneys based on recommendations from the Attorney Grievance Committee.Judge Marrero asserted that transparency is essential for public trust in the judicial process. However, he allowed an exception for dispositions made by the chief attorney, whose role involves preliminary investigations. These do not need to be public to maintain investigation flexibility and protect attorneys from baseless accusations.The case originated from complaints filed in 2021 against attorneys in the Queens County District Attorney's Office. Despite these complaints being publicized online, none resulted in public discipline. The plaintiffs argued that public access was necessary, while New York City's former corporation counsel claimed it was a misuse of the process for political gain.Marrero dismissed Presiding Justice Hector LaSalle's defense of legislative immunity, ruling that withholding information is not considered policymaking. He also refuted the state's claim that providing access to certain records would necessitate a substantial overhaul of court operations, stating that procedural adjustments, even if cumbersome, are not illegal.New York Judge Peels Back Curtain on Attorney Misconduct CasesThe First Circuit appears likely to uphold a noncompete agreement against a former DraftKings executive, Michael Hermalyn, who sought to join rival sports-betting firm Fanatics. During oral arguments, Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson questioned why California's worker-friendly policies should outweigh Massachusetts' business protections. Hermalyn, who relocated to California, argued for the state's ban on noncompete clauses to apply. However, the contract stipulates Massachusetts law, as DraftKings is based there.DraftKings accused Hermalyn of violating the agreement by joining a competitor and stealing company secrets. Hermalyn's legal team contended that California's interest in attracting workers should take precedence. Conversely, DraftKings' counsel argued that state laws are equal and California's stance should not override Massachusetts' policies.A federal district judge previously prohibited Hermalyn from working for competitors, dismissing his reliance on California law. This case arises amid the Federal Trade Commission's broader move to ban most noncompete agreements, although senior executives are currently exempt.Hermalyn's attempts to establish California residency involved leasing an apartment, buying a car, and other actions. Massachusetts law typically enforces contract terms unless they violate public policy. Hermalyn's counsel asserted California has the most substantial interest in this matter, urging respect for its policies. However, Judge William Kayatta expressed concerns about prioritizing one state's laws over others in similar circumstances.DraftKings' attorney warned that ruling in favor of Hermalyn could enable others to evade contractual obligations by relocating to California, stressing the need to protect Massachusetts businesses from such tactics. DraftKings also alleged Hermalyn's residency claim was a ploy and accused him of downloading sensitive files before departing.DraftKings' Noncompete Clause Meets Supportive First CircuitElon Musk's social media platform, X (formerly Twitter), is being sued by the PR firm Multiply for trademark infringement. Filed in a California federal court, the lawsuit claims that X's use of the "X" trademark for social-media marketing services causes consumer confusion and infringes on Multiply's established trademark rights. Multiply's spokesperson accused Musk of stealing their established identity and stated the necessity to protect their mark in court.X rebranded from Twitter to X last year under Musk's ownership. This rebranding has already resulted in confusion among Multiply's clients, who overlap with X Corp's clientele. Multiply, which has worked with brands like Arizona, Corona, and Liquid Death, adopted the "X" branding in 2019 and holds a federal trademark for its "X" logo. Multiply is seeking an injunction to stop X Corp from using the "X" trademark and is asking for monetary damages. This lawsuit is one among several, as other companies, including X Social Media, have also filed infringement claims against Musk's rebranded platform. The case is DB Communications LLC d/b/a Multiply v. X Corp, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 3:24-cv-04402.X Corp hit with lawsuit from PR firm over 'X' trademark | ReutersIn my column this week, I discuss the pressing need for the IRS to bolster its cryptocurrency compliance measures to close the crypto tax gap and combat illicit activities. Cryptocurrencies are often used for illegal activities, and many tax evaders in the crypto space prefer to remain anonymous to distance themselves from their actions.A recent report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) highlights significant gaps in the IRS's cryptocurrency tax enforcement. By improving compliance, the IRS can enhance transparency in financial transactions, address the crypto tax gap, and reduce illegal activities facilitated by digital currencies.Enforcing cryptocurrency taxes could yield substantial revenue and mitigate black market activities that harm the economy. Despite the potential benefits, the IRS's current efforts are inadequate. The TIGTA report notes that the IRS investigated only 390 cases involving digital currency between 2018 and 2023, with just 224 cases recommended for prosecution. The IRS's broader operation, “Hidden Treasure,” has focused more on training and tool acquisition than on actively pursuing crypto tax evaders.The use of digital currencies has exploded, with over 26,000 different types and a total market value exceeding $1.7 trillion. Estimates suggest that 21% to 40% of US adults have owned some form of virtual currency. Yet, auditing just 390 files is like pulling a few blades of grass from an acre and assuming a complete understanding of the field.Enhanced cryptocurrency compliance can significantly disrupt illicit activities reliant on digital currency anonymity. Cryptocurrencies are linked to crimes such as drug and human trafficking, ransomware, and terrorism. The IRS's $625,000 bounty for cracking the anonymity of Monero underscores the value of identifying cryptocurrency tax cheats.The IRS needs a coordinated approach to data sharing and analysis, leveraging artificial intelligence to handle vast data sets and uncover patterns. Financial or asset tracing, previously unfeasible on a large scale, becomes possible with advanced technology. Form 1040 already asks filers about digital assets; this data should be cross-referenced with information from exchanges and audits, focusing on high-income individuals for maximum audit returns.The TIGTA report emphasizes the urgency for the IRS to develop comprehensive compliance strategies, employing advanced data analytics and collaborating with blockchain analytics firms. The IRS must also work with other agencies to curb illegal cryptocurrency activities. While individual cryptocurrencies may remain untraceable, large transactions leave traces in the traditional banking system, providing crucial data points for analysis.The IRS has ample information on digital currency holders but may lack the context needed to connect taxes owed to individual taxpayers. Contextualizing existing data is key to closing the crypto tax gap and disrupting criminal enterprises reliant on cryptocurrency anonymity.To Improve Crypto Tax Gap, IRS Must Enhance Compliance Efforts This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, complementing the release of the GFCM Guidebook, Executive Director John Tuell engages in a discussion with Jonathan Cloud, the creator of the GFCM approach and co-author of the guidebook. Their conversation explores how GFCM transforms youth justice practices by prioritizing support for youth during their critical developmental stages, fostering positive identity formation, and promoting desistance from future offending behaviors. Jonathan outlines how GFCM acts as a guiding framework for youth justice practitioners, emphasizing its principles, practices, and transformative outcomes detailed in the GFCM Guidebook. Join us as we explore how the GFCM framework, rooted in research, drives profound and lasting behavioral changes among youth within the justice system. To learn more about the RFK National Resource Center and how we may be able to serve your community, please visit our website, contact our team, or follow us on social media: Website: www.rfknrcjj.org Contact Us: www.rfknrcjj.org/contact-us Social Media: Twitter/X - @RFKYouthJustice | LinkedIn

Today's guest is Kelly Sutton, MHL, BSN, RN, CCDS, CCS, CDI education specialist for ACDIS/HCPro. Today's show is part of the “Talking CDI” series. In every episode of this series, Director of Programming Rebecca Hendren is joined by a special guest, such as a member of the ACDIS Advisory Board or one of our expert Boot Camp instructors to discuss a topic pertinent to today's CDI profession. Our intro and outro music for the ACDIS Podcast is “medianoche” by Dee Yan-Kay and our ad music is “Take Me Higher” by Jahzzar, both obtained from the Free Music Archive. Have questions about today's show or ideas for a future episode? Contact the ACDIS team at info@acdis.org. Want to submit a question for a future "listener questions" episode? Fill out this brief form!  CEU info: Each ACDIS Podcast episode now offers 0.5 ACDIS CEUs which can be used toward recertifying your CCDS or CCDS-O credential for those who listen to the show in the first two days from the time of publication. To receive your 0.5 CEUs, go to the show page on acdis.org, by clicking on the “ACDIS Podcast” link located under the “Resources” tab. To take the evaluation, click the most recent episode from the list on the podcast homepage, view the podcast recording at the bottom of that show page, and click the live link at the very end after the music has ended. Your certificate will be automatically emailed to you upon submitting the brief evaluation. (Note: If you are listening via a podcast app, click this link to go directly to the show page on acdis.org: https://acdis.org/acdis-podcast/listener-questions-aki-encephalopathy-case-management-collaboration-and-more) Note: To ensure your certificate reaches you and does not get trapped in your organization's spam filters, please use a personal email address when completing the CEU evaluation form. The cut-off for today's episode CEU is Friday, July 19, at 11:00 p.m. eastern. After that point, the CEU period will close, and you will not be eligible for the 0.5 CEUs for this week's episode. Today's sponsor: Today's show is brought to you by ACDIS Encore: Clinical & Coding Online, August 13-15, featuring sessions recorded live during the 2024 ACDIS national conference! Click here to learn more: https://bit.ly/3yv2P5X. ACDIS update: Respond to the 2024 CDI Week Industry Survey by July 19! (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2024-CDI-Week-Industry-Survey) Apply to speak at the 2025 ACDIS conference, Physician Advisor Forum, or ACDIS Symposium: Outpatient CDI by July 26! (https://acdis.org/25speaker)  

This week, host Marc Cunningham speaks with Kara Sepulveda, Senior Corporate Risk & Insurance Manager at Lithia, whom he caught up with at RIMS RISKWORLD 2024. Kara shares her thoughts on employee care, industry misconceptions, and the strategic role of case management—particularly her commitment to proactive communication and continuous training in order to prevent client dissatisfaction and enhance relationships.Join us as we discuss:How proactive problem-solving from account managers positively impacts client retentionUsing field case managers early in an injury claim processThe role of personalization when engaging with injured employees

When it comes to work comp, a common saying rings true: an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The best way to ensure employees make it home safety every day is to prepare. However, injuries do happen. At the time of injury, choosing the right next step is crucial. Learn how a nurse triage program helps injured workers and their employers navigate what comes next with Lyndi Barthel, Manager of Medical Services and Case Management at MEM.

Join us for an insightful episode of the VRTAC-QM Manager Minute as Brittny MacIver and Sarah Clardy from the VRTAC-QM team share their expertise on case management systems. Brittny, an expert in Program and Performance within our Quality Management team, and Sarah, the Program Director for Fiscal and Resource Management, delve into best practices and the growing trend of states seeking to upgrade their systems. Learn about the nuances of state requests and the RFP process, and gain valuable knowledge to help you decide whether it's time to stay with your current system or make a move. Listen Here   Full Transcript:   {Music}   Brittny: Avoid over customizing the system. There's a lot of systems out there that are already available in VR agencies, and so if it works for that VR agency, there's a good chance the majority of the processes are going to work for your agency as well.   Sarah: Silos, how do we break down silos? And this process really can be a nice segue to combining program and fiscal together. I know we've said that multiple times, and I don't think we can say it enough. This process really is an opportunity to develop relationships.   Brittny: Be curious. Your agency may have a process that you're unsure why it exists. Some may say that's how it's always been. I think it's good to be curious, figure out the reason behind it, and see if there's a way that you can streamline those processes.   Intro Voice: Manager Minute brought to you by the VRTAC for Quality Management, Conversations powered by VR, one manager at a time, one minute at a time. Here is your host Carol Pankow.   Carol: Welcome to the Manager Minute. Today I'm thrilled to have two of my esteemed colleagues, Brittny MacIver and Sarah Clardy from the VRTAC-QM, joining me in the studio today. So, Brittny, how's it going for you?   Brittny: It's going great. How about you?   Carol: Awesome. I'm better for seeing your smiling face this morning. And how about you, Miss Clardy? How are you doing?   Sarah: I'm great. Great to kick off a new week.   Carol: Excellent. So for our listeners, Brittny serves on the program and performance side of our QM team. And Sarah is the program director for the fiscal and resource management side of our QM team. And both of these ladies have extensive experience with case management systems. And during one of our regular Core QM Team meetings, I asked the team, I'm like, hey, what are some potential podcast ideas? And Brittny said, you know what? There are a lot of state voc rehab agencies on a quest right now for a new case management system. Either your state is requesting you to do another request for proposal or you're just like, hey, is there something better out there? So with lots of new players that have entered the market, your case management system is a lifeline. And if it's not functioning optimally, it can really lead to some significant issues. So we just wanted to have a conversation today that can help to guide you through this journey with open eyes. So let's dig in. So of course our listeners always like to know, like how did you people get into VR? Everybody wonders, like what's your story? So I want to hear from each of you about kind of your journey into VR. So Sarah, I'm going to kick it off with you.   Sarah: So many of you know Ron Vessell, he's a staple around VR. Ron actually hired me back in the year 2000. I was a very green government accountant just starting out, didn't know what I was getting into, and they took a chance on a new, young professional. And so I did a deep dive early in my career and never looked back.   Carol: Very nice, I love that. How about you, Britt? How did you find your way into VR? You came a little different way.   Brittny: Yeah, I think it was definitely a unique path. I actually worked in criminal justice at the prison system as a counselor for quite some time. They were privatizing the position, which meant we were kind of losing benefits. We're no longer going to be a state employee. So I started looking around for other counseling positions. And at my time at the prison, I found that there was a lot of individuals with disabilities and a lot of obstacles that we had to address and assist with while we were there. And so when I seen the position at VR, I was very interested in it interviewed. And that's where I got my start about 14 years ago.   Carol: And which state was that in? Britt.   Brittny: That was in.Indiana.   Carol: Yeah. That's cool. I think that's great. So you worked with Teresa?   Brittny: Yes.   Carol: Very good.   Brittny: I always joke and say my four years at the prison. And then I have to clarify when I was working.   Carol: I love that. In fact, we had a guest last month that also had come up through the correctional system as well. It was really fun, but that definitely having that skill set behind you coming into VR is super important, really needed. So let's talk a little bit about your work. Both of you do for the QM. Just so our listeners have a little sense. And Britt, I'm going to start with you about that. Like can you give them a little flavor kind of for what you do in this TA world?   Brittny: Yeah, as you mentioned I work on the performance team. So really all things performance. But we help agencies address performance related needs. So this can be anywhere from training on performance measures to data analysis on performance data, reviewing policy procedures, internal controls and sometimes even assessing the system impact around performance and seeing how that impacts the reporting pieces.   Carol: Yeah, I love our performance team, the stuff you guys do, and you're so good at your analysis and really looking at taking that data and really digging in deep as to what's going on. So it's a very, very important piece of what is happening out there for our VR programs as we're delivering that technical assistance. How about you, Sarah?   Sarah: I have the great pleasure of leading the financial arm of the VRTACQM, and understanding that the VR award is the probably the most complex award within the grants management world. It really covers a wide array of skills and knowledge and isn't just financial based, it's also program based. So under the QM, we help agencies sort of manage the grant from the whole life cycle perspective, making sure that all the federal requirements are met, taking a look at individual state requirements, how those two things intersect, and we spend a lot of time, probably the majority of my time is actually spent in the period of performance arena, and specifically as it relates to this topic today with case management service systems.   Carol: Excellent. So, Brittny, you had mentioned the issue of people are looking for a new case management system. And I know as of late it feels like we've had at least a half a dozen folks saying, you know, we're doing a new RFP. We either have to for the state or we're going out for a new system. What advice do you have kind of off the bat for people who are considering venturing into this new RFP process?   Brittny: Yeah, I think before writing the RFP, I think it's important for the state or the agency to do some research on what systems are out there. A lot of agencies are writing an RFP based on what their current system does, and they end up with a very similar system. The process and all the hard work of getting a new system can be really exciting. It could mean new innovative features and easier case management process, which leads to improved efficiency, improve services and outcomes. You could find a system that would help with documentation times. You can reduce that, and then that way the counselor can spend more time with their participants. So I think just seeing what's out there and what's available to help you write that RFP is huge.   Carol: Sarah, how about you? What's your perspective on making sure those fiscal pieces are addressed as they are thinking about RFPing?   Sarah: Oh goodness. There's so many perspectives to consider here. I think first and foremost states need to understand period of performance. I feel like that's a term that we make really complicated. And it's really nothing more than just looking at the funding sources that are available and understanding the timeline that agencies can obligate and expend funds. So I think, first and foremost, understanding period of performance. The second key piece really is understanding state requirements. We have a lot of states that aren't either aware of what their state requires, or there are things that are in place that they think is required by the state. And when we start doing a deep dive into what that looks like, sometimes those things really aren't state requirements. It's something that somebody put into place years ago that everybody just thought was what was required. So I think understanding those two things. And then third, I would say understanding what your end game is when you're working with a fiscal and a case management system, and we're looking at just sheer fund accounting and tracking those funds all the way through and then being able to report at the end of that cycle. And so I oftentimes will tell states, if you kind of look at the end game, look at the reporting that's required at the end, it really kind of establishes the things that are necessary along the way in terms of system adaptations, structure, configuration.   Carol: So definitely I'm going to tie you two together when a state is going out and they're looking at doing the RFP, you want to really think about your complete process so that you've got all the right team members in place from the get go, which can't just be the program side of your house. And I remember us doing this back in Minnesota as we were going through the requirements. It's like, what are those fiscal people doing here? They're all important. Like you need all the pieces together, talking through how this system is going to work, how you're going to connect to your statewide accounting system. So that becomes really important. Now, I know I was on a call, I want to say within the last three, four months and we had a state say, yeah, we're thinking about RFP for a new system to go into place January 1st. And Brittny, I want to kick this to you. What is a realistic time frame if somebody is considering a new case management system, is it really possible to do that in, uh, maybe eight months or so or not? What do you think is a good timeline?   Brittny: I think this really depends on several factors as far as a timeline when considering a new case management system, typically it could take up to six months to develop that RFP. And it's really doing some background homework, seeing what's out there, doing a business process analysis and understanding your own business processes. But typically, I'd say depending on agency size, how many years of converted data you're looking at, converting it into the new system. And I know there's federal requirements, but there's also state requirements that are sometimes even longer than the federal ones. And then also if there's any interfaces. So if you have other systems that are connecting to your current case management system, this is going to make a huge difference, because now you've got a lot of different teams having to help out with the specifications and then also test the system. So you've got to think of their timelines as well. And then lastly just that preparedness piece. So how much work did you do up front on the RFP. How much have you analyzed your business processes. And like Sarah had mentioned, are these things that somebody put into place ten years ago, or are these things that are actually a state policy or a federal policy that you're aligning with? I think the typical timeline that I typically see is around 18 to 24 months for the full implementation once you sign in that contract. But again, that could range short or longer depending on that prep work and then that agency size and things like that.   Carol: So eight months is probably a little aggressive.   Brittny: Yeah very, aggressive yeah. But optimistic I like it.   Carol: I love it. So what are some pitfalls that we want to help our listeners avoid as they're kind of tackling this process? And Sarah, I'm going to kick that to you first.   Sarah: First and foremost. And I think the listeners are probably going to see a recurring theme here, as Brittny said, not just taking current system functionality and developing that into a checklist or using that to develop the specifications. I think really sitting down and outlining what are the requirements, what are the things that we're using right now? Where did that come from? And the possibilities going into this process allows a lot of opportunity to think outside the box and think about what are the things that systems currently aren't doing, or things that are requiring a lot more work right now where we could really get creative and do some really cool things. So I think avoiding the pitfall of just not spending that time up front to understand what it is that agencies need, and then also, again, bringing fiscal and program together to understand the requirements from a physical standpoint. A lot of times that is kicked to the finance folks in the House, we're still seeing in a lot of agencies a breakdown or a gap between program and fiscal, and there's a lot of danger and not bringing those two teams together to understand on both sides of the coin, what is it that we need to do? Oftentimes within that space is where a lot of the creative ideas come out and allow greater efficiencies within the agency and more internal controls.   Carol: Very good. Britt, what do you think about pitfalls? What are some things that we could help our folks avoid?   Brittny: Yeah, I once talked to a chief technology officer and he said the two main reasons why usually a case management system implementation fails is because of fiscal and data validation. So hitting those two pieces very hard, making sure that you're not only converting the data into the system, it's almost like that toy where you've got a round circle and you've got to fit it in the round circle. The data conversion doesn't always work like that, and sometimes you're trying to fit that round circle into a square peg. And that's because the way the systems line up. So making sure that you've got individuals on the front end in different roles, looking at that data and then also testing that RSA 911 to make sure things are mapped correctly and going in correctly before you go into production. At one example I've seen of that is significance of disability. And so one system may calculate significance of disability a little bit differently than another system. And even though they've got everything mapped together, doesn't always go hand in hand and can cause some major issues. The fiscal piece, I think Sarah mentioned that quite a bit, but just making sure that you're doing heavy testing and understanding how the system will work, especially when you go into production. Working in a new system, the biggest ones are dealing with authorizations that already have partial payments on it, draft authorizations, pending payments, amending an authorization, and vendor logic. These are all pieces that may be different in that new system. So making sure you're testing every angle and you're prepared for that transition. I think a third suggestion is just my personal preference would be to avoid over customizing the system. So there's a lot of systems out there that are already available in VR agencies. And so if it works for that VR agency, there's a good chance the majority of the processes are going to work for your agency as well. And sometimes those states like to over customize that system just because they want to have what they've always had. But that ends up being sometimes pretty expensive down the road, because then you're paying for additional testing and maintenance of that customization. So I'd be open minded to changing business processes, or see if you could find your business processes met in a different way and achieving that same result.   Carol: Yeah, I like it. I remember when we had our new case management system and it was built. We went in with all our partners, our WIOA partners, and so we had this kind of groovy new system, but it was supposed to meet all these different needs. Well, it gets complicated, but we couldn't forget about our field people because a lot of those folks in the field. So while you're talking to program, you know, a lot of times it's supervisors and different folks are involved. Having those direct field staff, your VR techs and your counselors who are inputting stuff every day and they're like, hey, this weird thing over here, you know, they may not talk techie, but they can explain the stuff that isn't working so well in getting all of those ideas right from them so they can see, hey, they really can help to impact and influence the system is important.   Brittny: Definitely.   Sarah: You know, Carol, along the lines of what Brittny just shared too, I think there's a caution there in terms of customizations that are in existing systems, whether it's an off the shelf system or a homegrown system. We have a number of agencies that have their own in-house systems. Sometimes there are customizations that work for a particular state or might work for a group of states, but it's not applicable to all states. Again, because we go back to those state requirements. And then sometimes when agencies implement that, it causes some compliance issues because of their own local procurement standards. So asking the question, you know, if they're developing those specifications and not just taking everything from what they're doing or is offered to them currently, but really looking at it with a cursory eye to determine, is this something that we need or we even can use because we're seeing period of performance compliance issues from some system functionalities that are in place that worked for other states that aren't necessarily a one size fits all.   Carol: I think one thing I've noticed too, and I just noticed from the periphery, you know, it's really statewide IT systems and the IT groups have been put together. You know, we see that consolidation happening where you may have had your own IT folks that you were dealing with, and now you have a State Department of IT or something. There's some other consolidated area that has put together different processes or requirements. So I think for some folks, if you're used to maybe the old way when you were entering into this process and maybe doing an RFP and you had more control over everything, you may have a little less because you do have now these sort of statewide IT system requirements. And so it's really important to get hooked up with those folks as well, especially for listeners who may have not done this for a while. Maybe, you know, it's been a long minute since you have looked at your case management system, and you were remembering back a decade ago when it was a little easier. You could just do something a little more at the drop of a dime. But I think the benefit that having those statewide IT groups is they have so much experience. And when they're looking at how they really address putting out an RFP and they can have a lot of their expertise to bring to the table to make sure this gets put together really well. You just want to remember that you may have some other things in play that you didn't have a long time ago. Just a thought. Alright, I know Brittny, when we were talking to you, had some ideas on cool stuff and I love cool stuff. Like, you know, if you're doing your case management system, you said, well, gee, don't, don't just recreate the same old thing like you want to put cool things in place. So do you have ideas like new technology or features or things people could include in their request?   Brittny: Yeah, I've seen dashboards where there's visual dashboards and graphs or pie charts that assist the counselor and case management. So seeing how many individuals they've got enrolled in an education program and how many of those individuals have earned an MSG in the last performance year. And this allows them to check those that haven't and reach out to those participants. I've also seen a central print and mail where the state's just actually the agency put a checkbox in there, and they've got an interface with a local company and that company, they hit the checkbox and everything gets bashed up that night for a letter or anything that they want to mail. And there's a mass every night they mail out all these letters. So that way the counselor could be anywhere. They could be at the school, out in the field, anywhere, mail out a letter, and not have to worry about printing something off and stuffing that envelope. I've also seen invoice payment systems. So systems where vendors can apply to be a vendor, they can document what services agree to terms, things like that. The agency can review them and approve them in there. And then that system can work back and forth with authorizations and payments. So an authorization could be drafted in the case management system could shoot over to this invoice payment system. That vendor can view it, upload documents, invoice against it, put reports and things like that in there, and they can communicate back and forth to one another. I've also seen states exploring various ways to integrate artificial intelligence and case management systems. So I know you did a podcast on one that was kind of outside the case management system, but I'm hearing a lot of states be interested in how to integrate it in the case management system, whether it's in case notes or informed decisions across. So I'm really excited to see what states come up with and how they're able to integrate that within. But I think that's a great idea.   Carol: I love that whole area of artificial intelligence. It was super fun when we did the podcast with Washington General, because they had that really cool piece that was, you know, an add on. It was kind of outside of the system. But boy, the staff love it. But there's a lot of possibilities. I know we were kicking around on the team about ways you could use AI within VR. I mean, when you think about the development of plans, even the way you speak about things, to make it more plain language, and I still I think people are so freaked out a little bit about AI and you go, gosh, it's all over. You know, it is in our whole world. It's when you're talking to Siri or Alexa, you know, every day you go to the airport and you're getting your eyes scanned to get through, Clear whatever you may do. It's just integrated into everything we do. I think that is a really fun, developing new area that has a lot of possibility for the case management systems. Sarah, did you have any ideas too, about any cool possible groovy tools? Maybe fiscally related? I didn't mean to put you on the spot.   Sarah: No, that's okay. We haven't seen as much innovation on the fiscal side, although I think that there are a lot of opportunities. I think, again, in the AI world, I think mapping that out, looking for the possibilities, it goes back to what I said earlier, just being an innovative thinker and looking at what are the challenges and efficiencies that we're battling and what are some of those possibilities that we can use to address that. Staff recruitment retention continues to be a challenge in our VR world and especially in the fiscal arena. And as staff look to bolster their internal controls and the program at large, looking for some of those opportunities. So I don't know that I have as many cool things like Brittny shares, but I'm hoping that we'll see those on the horizon.   Carol: Yeah, me too. I think there's a lot of possibility out there now. I know Sarah, you had developed a tool that coincided with the 2023 spring CSV conference because a lot of folks were asking like, okay, what do I do with my case management system and the fiscal requirements and all of that? Can you talk a little bit about that? Because even though we felt like we widely publicized it, people are still like what? There was a tool. I don't know anything about it.   Sarah: Yeah, absolutely. And I'm still excited about it. So we developed a fiscal technology checklist for case services last year in conjunction with the period of performance training that we offered at the conference. And we found that in our technical assistance to state VR agencies around this topic, there's a gap in communication between either the CMS companies and VR, or even if an agency has their own internal program, a gap in communication between the program and fiscal and whoever those IT experts are. So we took that opportunity to map out all of the areas to consider. And so when we're working with agencies under the VRTAC-QM to analyze their processes and look at how their systems are set up, there's a linear fashion and way of looking at that. For instance, is the system set up on a state fiscal year or a federal fiscal year? There's a lot of agencies that have a system set up on a state year that really doesn't make sense for reporting, and it's causing a lot of challenges on the financial side with producing reports for the RSA 17, for example. And they thought that that's the way they had to have it set up. There's very few states that have very state specific requirements that would necessitate that. So it's not that it never would work, but it involves sort of a deep dive into why do we have our systems set up and is that necessary? The other big piece are the budgets. How are budgets set up within the system? Does it map out to the available fund sources that are available to the agency? And then there's a ton of bells and whistles that act as internal controls in the back of a case management system that really dictate how the system behaves and helps the agency navigate through period of performance. And so it's going through a whole list of considerations to make sure that the agency is well equipped to manage period of performance, manage those different fund sources and make them able to do that reporting at the end. So it's a really good list. And honestly, as states are struggling with that communication piece, particularly with the companies that they work with or through the process to develop a new case management system, it's a very nice way of considering all of those different elements that need to go into either evaluating the current system or looking at a new system to make sure that it's meeting exactly what their state requires while still taking into account those federal requirements. So we're constantly reverting folks back to that list, and hopefully agencies are taking the time to sit down as a team and combining the program and fiscal staff to walk through that, to make sure that they understand all of those elements. And if they have questions, we have a number of trainings that we offer through the VRTAC-QM to assist with that. We've even had some agencies seek out that training before they start developing those lists for their RFPs, to make sure that they both understand from a physical standpoint what all those requirements are. So anyway, it's Fiscal Technology Checklist for Case Services. It is on our website, I'm sure. Carol, you're probably going to mention that and hint, hint it is available to the public. So I know that there's been some current CMS companies that have gone out and looked at that piece also, so that they can better understand and hopefully fill in the gap for that communication gap exists so that everybody's talking the same language and on the same page.   Carol: Yes, of course, I have to make a shameless plug for our lovely website. So you will go to vRTAC-QM.org and we have a top navigation header. You can go right to resources and everything's listed under the CSAVR Spring 2023 Session Recordings and Materials. And it actually was Session Two is where you can find that checklist. But if you scroll through you can actually listen to Sarah's session recording. And then you can see the checklist there as well, as well as all of our other awesome sessions from the 2023 Spring Conference. Oh, thanks for that. So how about other words of wisdom from you fine ladies? Because I think of you both as just like, oh my gosh, such powerhouses in the case management system. Brittny, I'm going to go to you first.   Brittny: I've got a few. I think the first one is to be curious. Your agency may have a process that you're unsure why it exists. Some may say that's how it's always been. So I think it's good to be curious, figure out the reason behind it, and see if there's a way that you can streamline those processes. I would also allocate staff specifically for this project, and I think we mentioned it already a little bit earlier. But looking at those projects subject matter experts and making sure you've got the right people at the table. So this is going to be administration, IT, but also your fiscal people, your front end people. It's really important to make sure that you have some direct service or direct field staff that are knowledgeable and have a long agency history that you can integrate into that project as well, and they can provide feedback. I would also have a designated project manager that could be somebody. You within your department, or that could be somebody that you decide to contract out. But I think it's important that they have that project management experience because it is a giant project, and it is going to take quite some time to get from that RFP contract to implementation. I'd also weave in changes as much as you can. So during the project, you'll start to have the opportunity to see the differences between the two systems, your current one and your new system. And so if there's any way that you can weave in changes early and often, this will help that transition for staff much, much easier. And then also as you're preparing or updating revising business processes, that also helps with that piece of it. I've seen states do statewide quarterly demos to kind of show staff the new system and help them kind of process that change along the way. And lastly, I would definitely emphasize not to overlook accessibility. I'd pull in your accessibility users early to begin testing the system, and then also integrating those accessibility terms into training documents. I think one thing I learned is that using language accessibility language is huge. I couldn't imagine trying to learn a new system and somebody saying, use a dropdown box. But yet my system is calling it a combo box. So using that terminology and making this transition much easier for all staff.   Carol: Awesome points. I want to highlight a couple, that be curious. I can't emphasize that enough. There are so many agencies where I'm going to call it urban Legend. You're doing something because everybody always says, RSA said. You have to do that and RSA will come out. I've been in monitoring. They're like, we never told you that. Whatever that is in your system, you made that up like you made that happen. So I love that being curious because you want to ask questions. A lot of times you just go with the flow. You know, somebody put it in play 20 years ago and then you just keep bringing it forward. So I love that. And definitely when you talk about dedicating staff, you want to make sure you dedicate those staff, but you also want to think about all of the other roles that have been assigned to that person. You cannot put them as the project manager of this whole project, and they're still maintaining all their field services duties and doing all the other stuff, because this really is a full time job. And I know I'm going to apologize right here to Natasha Jerde. We had her as a project manager for our new case management system. At the same time, she's, you know, rewriting our policy and procedure manual and doing a million other things because I just had zero clue at how much went into this. And that was really it's really terrible. And I've actually seen some of the staff across the country burn out. We've had people retire early. They're like the case management system process killed me. So when you're dedicating staff, please do give them some time to do it. And don't expect that they're not going to work an 80 hour workweek because that is not so fabulous. But I loved your points, Brittny, those are great. How about you, Sarah? Any words of wisdom?   Sarah: Yes, thank you. I think we constantly hear from state agencies about silos. How do we break down silos? And this process really can be a nice segue to combining program and fiscal together. I know we've said that multiple times in our discussion today, but I don't think we can say it enough. This process really is an opportunity to develop relationships and I know even from the agency that I came from, the introduction that I had to the program side was through a new case management system conversion. And at first I showed up at the table. And Carol, like you said earlier, people were like, who invited her? Why is she here? Does she need to be here? People wouldn't talk and share ideas. And then as we both committed to developing that relationship and understanding one another better, not only did we end up with a quality product, but we had quality services, we had better management and leadership within the agency. So looking at it as an opportunity sort of through that lens, engage the folks in the field as well. Sometimes as leaders, we tackle these types of projects and we think the folks in the field are too busy. And really the best ideas can come from our counselors and those individuals who are supporting in those roles our field staff, our fiscal agents. And I know we have a separate training on that that we offer VR agencies, but engaging them in that process and getting their ideas on, hey, what's working and what's not working? What are the challenges that you're facing so that as you are curious to Brittny's point, you're taking into consideration maybe some of those wins that you can secure on the other side and maybe cut out some process or things while still meeting those requirements and engaging in those efficiencies. The other thing I would offer, and we're having lots of discussions now about fiscal forecasting and spending strategies within VR agencies, as VR agencies are getting over the hump of Covid and taking a look at what their spending looks like, the case management system really is a system of record. And as we look at the statewide accounting system and in its function, we can't ignore the case management system and the role that it plays in navigating through all those fiscal requirements. And so if we think about the CMS sort of as the VR checkbook, and when we are authorizing for services and obligating funds, not only are there requirements around how to do that and how to capture that, looking at the individual sources of funds that we have available, it really is a way to capture those obligations within a checkbook so that we can take a look at any point in time from a leadership standpoint, what is our financial position? And so being able to look at how much do I have in my 23 carryover checkbook and how much do I have in 24. And plan ahead so that I can make decisions around re-allotment and I can think ahead so that we're not leaving funds on the table and lapsing funds at the back end of our of our award. It really is important that we look at how we capture all of that in the case management system in a way that allows us to continue managing our programs with a strong fiscal focus. So tying all of that in is also important at a higher level, so that we can use the data to make quality financial decisions.   Carol: Well said, well said. So in case our listeners want to get a hold of either of you, would you mind sharing your email address, Brittny?   Brittny: Yes, definitely. My email address is bMacIver So m a c I v e r@sdsu.edu. It's also available on our VRTAC website. If you go to our staff you'll see my email address there as well.   Carol: Excellent. Sarah, how about you.   Sarah: Yes thank you. It's sClardy. so, that's s c l a r d y at Sdsu.Edu.   Carol: Thanks so much I appreciate you both joining me today. Have a great one, you guys.   Brittny: Thanks.   Sarah: Thank you.   {Music}   Outro Voice: Conversations powered by VR, one manager at a time, one minute at a time, brought to you by the VR TAC for Quality Management. Catch all of our podcast episodes by subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening!

If you realize that case management work is no longer an area of work you are interested in or enjoy. This episode is for you. I share signs that you need an exit plan to leave case management work and the steps you need to take to make that happen without going back to school to get another degree, taking a demotion, or leaving the workforce. --- Grab my free e-course to learn more about macro social work careers: macroandpaid.com

In this episode, Meliza Weiner, BESLER's Sr. Manager of Revenue Cycle, provides us with a glimpse into our next webinar, The Role of Case Management in the Revenue Cycle, presented live on May 29, at 1 PM ET.

In this episode of Sisters in Sobriety, Sonia and Kathleen explore the multifaceted world of recovery support, diving deep into the roles of one-on-one coaching, sober companions, and group support systems. They are joined by Alida Flannery. Alida is the Founder of Epiphany Recovery Inc., an organization that provides Recovery Coaching, Companioning, and Case Management services to individuals who are struggling with substance use and disordered eating. She is a Certified Addiction Recovery Coach and Companion, who completed her Intervention training with Earl Hightower in 2018, and has previously worked for several in-patient treatment centres across Canada. Alida is the Co-Founder of SOULBRIETY, a sober collective for women offering retreats, events, and group workshops to those who are sober-curious, sober-exploring and sober-serious. She also works with Amazing Grace Canada, a charity whose mission is to bring recovery to families and communities affected by addiction in developing nations.Throughout the episode, listeners will hear a broad discussion on the different paths to successful recovery. Key questions include: What is the role of a sober companion in the recovery process? How does one tailor recovery support to meet individual needs? What are some common misconceptions about sober companionship? These questions are dissected, offering a thorough understanding of the nuances involved in each recovery pathway.Listeners will gain valuable knowledge on the educational aspects of recovery support, such as the importance of a safe transition from rehab to home, the challenges of maintaining sobriety in a familiar environment, and the need for personalized recovery plans.Alida shares her own experiences and stories from her work as a sober companion. She reveals the small yet significant victories in recovery, such as a client successfully setting boundaries or enjoying a sober weekend with family. These stories underscore the emotional and transformative journey of recovery, making the episode relatable and inspiring.This is Sisters in Sobriety, the support community that helps women change their relationship with alcohol. Check out our substack for extra tips, tricks, and resources.Highlights:[00:01:08] – Alida explains the public perception of sober companionship, mentioning its association with the rich and famous.[00:01:27] – Alida describes the role of a sober companion, providing support throughout the day.[00:02:00] – Alida talks about the challenges of returning home from rehab and the importance of having a sober companion during this transition.[00:03:06] – Discussion on the need to navigate interpersonal relationships and daily challenges after rehab.[00:03:45] – Alida elaborates on providing support for those who can't leave their lives for extended treatment, such as single parents.[00:04:22] – Kathleen asks how Alida tailors her companionship to individual clients, and Alida explains her intuitive approach.[00:05:18] – Alida talks about receiving briefings from families or treatment centers and the importance of the right fit for effective companionship.[00:07:06] – Alida emphasizes observing and understanding the client's daily routines and interpersonal interactions.[00:08:00] – Kathleen inquires about common misconceptions of sober companionship, and Alida addresses these.[00:09:34] – Alida clarifies her role as a motivator, cheerleader, problem solver, and advocate, not a housekeeper or chef.[00:10:17] – Discussion on the importance of the recovery doing the work themselves for successful outcomes.[00:12:08] – Alida shares her personal commitment to protecting her own recovery fiercely.[00:13:14] – Sonia asks Alida to describe a typical day as a sober companion, and Alida explains the variability in her daily routines.[00:15:17] – Alida highlights the importance of establishing a new recovery routine and lifestyle at home.[00:17:49] – Alida discusses the challenge of rewiring daily activities that were previously associated with substance use.[00:19:22] – Establishing a daily routine involving making the bed, nourishing oneself, and incorporating activities like prayer, meditation, and journaling.[00:20:00] – Alida reflects on the transformational moments and small victories that signify successful recovery.[00:24:41] – Closing remarks by Kathleen, expressing gratitude to Alida and inviting her for future discussions.LinksSisters In Sobriety Substack - find more tips, tricks, resources, and communitySisters In Sobriety EmailSonia's EverBlume WebsiteSonia's EverBlume InstagramKathleen's Website Kathleen does not endorse any products mentioned in this podcastKathleen's Instagram

In this exclusive Live Podcast Event, we dive into pulmonary artery catheters (PACs), a critical tool in the management of critically ill patients. Often regarded as a cornerstone in the monitoring of hemodynamics, PACs provide invaluable insights into the heart's function and the pulmonary circulation's state. We will unpack the principles behind how they measure key physiological parameters such as pulmonary artery pressure, cardiac output, and mixed venous oxygen saturation. These metrics are vital for diagnosing and managing conditions like heart failure, shock, and pulmonary hypertension.Featuring leading Critical Care Expert Nicole Kupchik, MN, RN, CCNS, CCRN-CMC, PCCN, CEO - Nicole Kupchik Consulting, this episode brings you the latest research and technological advancements related to pulmonary artery catheters. Whether you're a CVICU nurse seeking to deepen your understanding of hemodynamic monitoring or simply curious about the science behind the use case of PACs, this episode offers comprehensive insights into the use of pulmonary artery catheters in critical care.Giveaway! You could WIN a copy of Nicole's Book “Critical Care Survival Guide” (a $100 value!) in our social media giveaway! Find us on Instagram @crnaschoolprepacademy. We're running the contest May 8th through 10th so don't miss out! Get a FREE Copy of the Slides Used in this Presentation! Click Here: https://mailchi.mp/kupchikconsulting/cspa-pulmonary-artery-catheter FREE! 8 Steps to Becoming a CRNA: https://www.cspaedu.com/3m9jgffpLearn How to Ace Your CCRN®, PCCN®, CMC® or CSC® Certification Exams with Nicole Kupchik: Click HereGet access to planning tools, interview preparation opportunities, valuable CRNA Faculty guidance, and mapped-out courses that have been proven to accelerate your CRNA success! Become a member of CRNA School Prep Academy: https://cspaedu.com/joinGet CRNA School insights sent straight to your inbox! Join the CSPA email list: https://www.cspaedu.com/podcast-emailJoin the Free Facebook Community here! https://www.facebook.com/groups/crnaschoolprepacademyfreeBook a mock interview, resume or personal statement critique, transcript review and more: www.teachrn.com

Previously, Kati had a series of episodes on nursing communication. This mega dose combines all episodes into one for easy listening! The topics include: How to talk to your nursing colleagues, CNAs, and medical unit receptionists and deal with things like how to navigate when your urgency level changes or challenges in working together Learning what everyone on the healthcare team actually wants to know when they want an update (PT, OT, ST, Case Management, Social Work, medical team, and more) Cool vs. not cool ways to handle things  Simple things you can do and say to look and feel more comfortable as the patient's nurse Tips on delivering tough news and how to be in those big moments while holding it together and being a strong but caring presence for your patient How to engage with your own family and loved ones who might not understand all that you go through at a normal day of work These episodes were originally recorded in 2021 and are still very relevant for today's new nurse.  For ALL of our new nurse content:https://www.freshrn.com/new-grad-nursing/  For a free mini-course on report tips for new nurses (including my fave report sheet), click here: https://courses.freshrn.com/p/med-surg-report-basics To learn more about our comprehensive med-surg crash course, Med-Surg Mindset, click here: https://courses.freshrn.com/p/med-surg-mindset For my free cardiac assessment checklist, click here: https://bit.ly/4aV6RTO For my most-used medical abbreviations, click here: https://bit.ly/44mnTri Learn more about the FreshRN All-Access Pass here - https://courses.freshrn.com/p/membership To see our latest course catalog (med-surg, ICU, precepting, charge nurse, ortho, cardiac, neuro courses and more), click here: https://courses.freshrn.com/ Get weekly tips, encouragement, stories from the bedside, and more - just for nursing students and new nurses at: https://www.freshrn.com/email-sign-up/  Connect With Me Online! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FreshRN Twitter: https://twitter.com/Kati_Kleber Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/Fresh_RN/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kati_kleber/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@freshrn Music credit: Keep My Cool by Benj Heard  

In 2021, the Bloomberg Law Survey reached a sobering milestone. For the first time, attorneys reported feeling stressed about their workload more than HALF of the time. Setting aside the very serious and very real consequences to one's health, when your profession is one that bills by the hour, spending half of that time in “damage-control” mode is less than optimal. But as my guest, Courtney Redman, points out, what's more troubling is that while many of these attorneys know this isn't sustainable, they can't seem to point to one specific thing, task, or procedure that's holding them back. With more than a decade of experience in nearly every support role a law firm can have, Courtney came to learn that oftentimes the “thing” that needs to be fixed is how THINGS get done in the first place. This realization, coupled with a desire to help and coordinate at multiple levels, led her to found Legacy Contracts, a full-service administrative organization that works with medium and large firms on everything from Case Management and Workflow to Invoicing, Billing, and Process Implementation. This week's conversation is definitely one for the organization and systems nerds out there, but I would encourage lawyers and leaders at every stage to listen, if only to gain an understanding of how vital this unseen work is.Enjoy the show!

Discover how Sebastian Westerby, CEO and Co-founder of Tort Experts, transforms the legal marketing realm using formidable lead and case acquisition techniques on the latest episode of Invest In Yourself: the Digital Entrepreneur Podcast. Host Phil Better delves into Sebastian's unique story of entrepreneurship initiated at the cusp of the COVID-19 pandemic, seizing a market void to generate exceptional ROI for their clients. Learn the secrets behind Tort Experts' groundbreaking software that optimizes marketing processes and guarantees cost per case, all while prioritizing transparency and accessibility to justice. This episode isn't just a journey through the ingenious strategies that catapulted Tort Experts to success in record time; it's a masterclass in maximizing every opportunity and leveraging adversity—essential listening for any aspiring digital entrepreneur eager to leave an indelible mark on their industry. Tune in and get inspired to craft your path and, like Sebastian, invest in creating a legacy that transcends.

Guest: Kristin Martinez, MA, CCC-SLP - This episode explores challenges and best practices related to school-based case management in telepractice. Opportunities to prepare for case management responsibilities in a new teletherapy assignment and tips and strategies related to case management will be discussed.

In this special series focused on legal case management software, host Emery Wager explores various case management companies to help firms make informed decisions. In this episode, we welcome Jared Correia to the Financially Legal Podcast. Jared, the CEO of Red Cave Consulting and the Cofounder of Gideon Software, shares strategies for selecting the right software, whether to use all-in-one systems vs. pulling together best-in-class systems, the future of AI in legal case management software, and the dangers associated with breakfast burritos and falling asleep at your desk. To receive a free legal case management software consult and to view a database of legal case management software, visit our case management center.

Editor's Summary by Kristin Walter, MD, MS, Deputy Editor of JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, for the March 26, 2024, issue.

Watch the YouTube version of this episode HEREHave you ever wondered what it takes to build a successful law practice? In this episode, Tyson takes a dive deep into the essentials of law firm growth and how to properly structure a firm for maximum efficiency. The way a firm is set up can really determine how well it will succeed. Tyson shares the successful method of structuring a law firm using the pod model. The pod model is a team of 3 people which is led by an attorney. They are supported by a case manager and a litigation assistant. This model ensures every attorney has 2 dedicated team members to help with their caseload. A benefit of this structure and why it works so well is the ability to cross train amongst the case manager and litigation assistant. That way staff are skilled in a few different things if there is a need to backfill.Tyson provides a few tips for law firm owners to use to make sure the pod model works well. Communication is a huge key to not only the success of the pod structure but managing teams as a whole. Scheduling regular team meetings within and outside pods is great to touch base on what is happening with cases. Another tip is the use of a communication tool like Clic or Slack to quickly reach other staff as a way to ensure people stay connected.Listen in to learn more!1:11 The benefits of structuring law firms using the pod model2:10 The distinct responsibilities of roles within the pod structure3:11 The advantages of the pod team structure5:55 Tips for successful team managementTune in to today's episode and checkout the full show notes here.

Welcome to Crawlspace. In this episode Tim Pilleri and Lance Reenstierna speak with Todd Matthews, Director of Communications & Case Management for The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (or NamUs). He helps to match missing people with unidentified human remains. Obituary: https://www.speckfuneral.com/obituary/SpeckFuneralHome-Todd-Matthews. Todd's FB: https://www.facebook.com/j.toddmatthews. Todd on X: https://twitter.com/UnForgotten. Statement from NamUs: https://namus.nij.ojp.gov/#0-0. Check out The Skeleton Crew book that features Todd wherever books are sold: https://www.amazon.com/Skeleton-Crew-Amateur-Sleuths-Americas/dp/1451657595/. Barbara Ann Hackmann Taylor wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Ann_Hackmann_Taylor. Check out our Missing subscription service where we have a bonus show and ad-free episodes! https://missing.supportingcast.fm/ Use promo code, "Missing" for your first month FREE! Follow Missing: TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@missingcsm YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/missingcsm IG: https://www.instagram.com/MissingCSM/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/MissingCSM FB: https://www.facebook.com/MissingCSM Check out our entire network at http://crawlspace-media.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices