sync: auto-sync from HOWARD-HOME at 2026-06-24 15:39:19

Author: Howard Enos
Machine: HOWARD-HOME
Timestamp: 2026-06-24 15:39:19

.claude/memory/project_cascades_carf_tech_plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+---
+name: project_cascades_carf_tech_plan
+description: Cascades technology plan is a CARF accreditation deliverable, not an MSP status report
+metadata:
+  type: project
+---
+
+The Cascades of Tucson "technology plan" Ashley Jensen requested (2026-06) is for **CARF
+accreditation** (Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, Aging Services
+program). Her agenda list maps to CARF's **Technology and System Plan** standard (Section 1
+"CARF Plans"; the 8 canonical areas: hardware, software, security, confidentiality, backup,
+assistive technology, disaster recovery, virus protection).
+
+**Why it matters:** the document is **Cascades' plan, adopted by their leadership** (ACG is the
+IT partner who supplies the technical content), NOT an ACG sales/status doc. CARF surveyors
+check it as a **living action document** that, for each area, lists: current tech + unmet/
+projected needs + timeline + possible vendor + estimated/actual cost + person responsible +
+target date + completion date. Must be **based on needs of persons served/personnel/stakeholders**,
+**aligned to the strategic plan**, and **reviewed/updated at least annually with dated sign-off**.
+
+**How to apply:** any Cascades tech-plan deliverable must use the CARF action-plan structure
+(owner/cost/dates columns), include a resident/persons-served assistive-technology dimension,
+a backup-policy section, and a version/annual-review block. CARF passes on a credible REVIEWED
+plan, not on zero gaps. Verify exact standard citation + review cadence against their current
+Aging Services Standards Manual (2025/2026 edition). Deliverables live in
+`clients/cascades-tucson/docs/proposals/`. Pairs with [[feedback_impeccable_on_outbound]],
+[[policy_pricing_verification]] (cost figures must be verified).