DRAFT Planning Logic Models to Design Structural Interventions

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MINNESOTAS HIV TREATMENT CASCADE. Introduction This slide set describes the continuum of HIV care in Minnesota. The slides rely on data from HIV/AIDS.
Advertisements

State of Texas HIV Planning &. Goals for the National HIV/AIDS Strategy 1.Reduce new HIV infections 2.Increase access to care and improve health outcomes.
BENEFITS BASED PROGRAMMING
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities Chicago, IL.
Community Planning Training 1-1. Community Plan Implementation Training 1- Community Planning Training 1-3.
Advancing HIV Prevention Programs on HBCU Campuses: Leveraging Programs, Policies and Partnerships.
Milwaukee Partnership to Respond to 2009 EPI AID Study in Milwaukee Brenda Coley Diverse and Resilient, Inc.
1 From Evidence to Action Replicating and Adapting Evidence-Driven Interventions at the Local Level Shannon Thomas Ryan David Lewis-Peart.
Association between area- level poverty and HIV diagnoses, and differences by sex, New York City Ellen Wiewel, HIV Epidemiology & Field Services.
HIV Care Continuum, District 8- 2 Southwest (Albany), Georgia, 2012.
The Minority AIDS Initiative (MAI): Then and Now Edwin M. Craft, Dr. P
HIV Care Continuum, Georgia, United States, 2011 Presented to American Public Health Association, Annual Meeting Presented by Deepali Rane, MBBS, MPH,
STATE OF THE STATE SHELLEY LUCAS HIV/STD PREVENTION & CARE BRANCH DEPT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES AUGUST 3, 2015.
HIV Care Continuum New Diagnoses, 2011, Fulton County, Georgia.
HIV Care Continuum, District 10 Northeast (Athens), Georgia, 2012.
HIV Care Continuum Persons Living With HIV, Georgia, 2012.
Introduction to NCHHSTP National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention Office of the Director Jonathan Mermin, MD, MPH National.
The Continuum of HIV Care Florida, 2014 The Continuum of HIV Care Florida, 2014 Lorene Maddox, MPH Karalee Poschman, MPH Living data through 2014, as of.
The HIV Care Continuum: A Tool for Driving Systematic Change to Support Better Engagement in Care Jeffrey S. Crowley Distinguished Scholar/ Program Director.
HIV Care Continuum New Diagnoses, 2011, Georgia. Persons with HIV Engaged in Selected Stages of the Continuum of Care, United States Percent
Leaders in Networking & Knowledge (LINK) II Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GMHC) Kathleen D. Gallagher, MPH Kalyani Sanchez.
Session 2: Developing a Comprehensive M&E Work Plan.
Session 7: Planning for Evaluation. Session Overview Key definitions:  monitoring  evaluation Process monitoring and process evaluation Outcome monitoring.
So You Think You’ve Made a Change? Developing Indicators and Selecting Measurement Tools Chad Higgins, Ph.D. Allison Nichols, Ed.D.
Thematic Priorities for ATF Applications Presentation by Secretariat of Council for the AIDS Trust Fund in Briefing Session on 27 July
2016 NATIONAL RYAN WHITE CONFERENCE ON HIV CARE & TREATMENT Addressing Disparities in HIV Care to Reach Zero Infections Michael Hager Manager of Communities.
Integrated Epidemiologic Profiles for HIV Prevention and Care Planning Anna Satcher Johnson Stacy Cohen HIV Incidence and Case Surveillance Branch Division.
HRSA Talk: HIV From the Inside USCA 2016 – September 17, 2016 Harold Phillips, Director Office of Domestic & Global HIV Training & Capacity Development.
Integrating Program Innovation to Improve Prevention and Care Services USCA 2016 – September 17, 2016 April Stubbs-Smith, MPH Director, Division of Domestic.
The Landscape of Project PrIDE Data Reporting Requirements
Quick Review This presentation is the first in a series of presentations intended to familiarize you with disparities calculation Part I: YOU ARE HERE!
We envision a Hennepin County where:
State Office of AIDS Update
Module 4: Engaging KPs with HIV and SRH Services
IAS Satellite Session 25th July 2017 Daniel Were, PhD
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities
Addressing Disparities in HIV Care to Reach Zero Infections
Clinical Project Meeting
Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities
Catalina Sol, MPH John Nelson, PhD, CPNP Tisha Wheeler, MSc
Combating HIV Among Black Gay and Bisexual Men
HIV Epidemiological Profile for Chicago EMA
NYSDOH AIDS Institute Quality of Care Program eHIVQUAL
Getting to the second 90 in adolescent HIV: What is needed
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities
Introduction to Program Evaluation
Strategic Prevention Framework - Evaluation
PrEP introduction for Adolescent Girls and Young Women
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities
Providing Guidance For Early Identification, Enhance Testing, and Fast Tracking to Care EIIHA Pilot Projects.
Elements of the Care Continuum
Ann Robbins HIV/STD Prevention and Care Branch August 6, 2012
Building Changes’ Strategic Business Planning Process
Health care for the Homeless Strategic Planning 2018
SRH & HIV Linkages Agenda
4.2 Identify intervention outputs
Retention: What It Means for You
Among 3647 MSM not using SMS prior to PS interview. Bold = p<0.05.
Sustaining Primary Care-Public Health Partnerships
Illustrating the HIV Care Continuum in U.S. Cities
Needs Assessment Slides for Module 4
Public/Population Health Approach to Substance Abuse Prevention & Treatment Determine the Burden of Substance Abuse and Service Barriers to Develop Plan.
Core Medical Services Waiver
Using Logic Models in Project Proposals
HIV in Minnesota: Challenges and Opportunities
Illustrative Cluster Detection and Response Strategy
Importance of Data Quality for National HIV Prevention Program Monitoring and Evaluation Presented by: Guoshen Wang, MS Shubha Rao, MPH; Hui Zhao, MS;
Presentation transcript:

DRAFT Planning Logic Models to Design Structural Interventions Description: This tool provides participants of our Social Determinants of Health/Structural Interventions course with an opportunity to practice designing a Structural Intervention (SI) using Logic Models. Participants are divided into groups to design a logic model around their assigned priority population and addressing gaps in the HIV Care or PrEP Continuum. By the end of the exercise, participants will define the type of SI designed, identify the appropriate level of intervention, and determined the NHAS indicator Logic Model Exercise DRAFT

Note to the Reviewer The purpose of this tool is to provide participants with an opportunity to practice designing a Structural Intervention (SI) using Logic Models. Participants are divided into groups to design a logic model around their assigned priority population through three parts. In Part A, participants choose a gap in the HIV Care or PrEP Continuum, summarize conditions contributing to the gap, identify 1-2 social determinants of health, and indicate which of the 3 As the SI will address: Acceptability, Accessibility and Availability. Part B involves participants describing the type of SI their designing, identifying stakeholders, and determining whether the SI will intervene on the community, organizational or societal level. In Part C, participants define the outputs, intermediate outcomes and NHAS indicators of the SI. This exercise is a total of 30 minutes.

Planning Logic Model Priority Population and Gap in Care/ PrEPContinuum: (HIV Status, Linkage, Engagement-Retention, Med. Adherence, or PrEP Awareness, Uptake, Adherence): Social Determinants 3A’s Level of Intervention SI Type and Description Outputs Outcomes •Poverty •Homelessness •Stigma •Racism •Education •Availability •Acceptability •Accessibility •Community •Organizational •Societal •Economic •Environmental •Social •Policy j• Agency deliverables •Population changes as a result of successful intervention implementation. NHAS Indicator: Stakeholders: 35 This is a template for completing a LM for a SI Many of the headings probably look familiar, as we have covered several of these terms (Review each heading beginning with the Priority population and continuum gap, ending with the NHAS indicators) Now, let’s look at how to complete this Go to next slide

Planning Logic Model for SIs Part A: Choose a gap in the HIV Care Continuum or PrEP Continuum for your assigned priority population. Summarize the conditions that contribute to the gap. Identify 1-2 social determinants to address. Indicate which of the 3As your SI will address. We have just reviewed the planning LM and described how to complete it. Now, we are going to give you all a chance to do the same, but in parts For this next exercise, divide participants into groups, based on priority populations If possible and depending on group composition, groups may be developed based on jurisdiction or HD If this is the case, have them identify a priority population in their small groups Review slide above instruct groups to identify a recorder, and a reporter to summarize to the larger group, once Part A is completed Distribute a LM work-sheet based on the above SI LM template Distribute one large LM template that small groups will transfer information onto for later sharing with the large group Briefly go to next slide, to illustrate an example of these completed steps, then return to current slide with instructions 3) Allow approximately 30 minutes for small groups to complete this exercise (including transferring information on LM template on wall)

Planning Logic Model: Part A Priority Population and Gap in Care/ PrEPContinuum: High HIV Incidence among Young Latino MSM Social Determinants 3A’s Level of Intervention SI Type and Description Outputs Outcomes •Poverty •Homelessness •Stigma •Homophobia •Racism •Education •Availability •Accessibility •Acceptability NHAS Indicator: Stakeholders: 35 a) So to summarize with the LM template: Select a continuum gap that your SI will address Identify the external conditions (e.g., SDH, HI, SV, etc) that contribute to the gap 3) Prioritize a few (1-3) that you will propose to address with a SI Underline and Bold or highlight those that will be prioritized in the column above 4) Indicate which of the 3 As your SI will address b) Review the example above, with the completed sections c) Return to previous slide, keeping instructions posted for participants

Planning Logic Model for SIs Part B: Determine level at which your SI will intervene (community, organizational, societal). Determine type of SI proposed (economic, environmental, social, policy). 3. Describe your SI, addressing the above factors. 4. Identify stakeholders.

Planning Logic Model – Part B Priority Population and Gap in Care/ PrEPContinuum: High HIV Incidence among Young Latino MSM Social Determinants 3A’s Level of Intervention SI Type and Description Outputs Outcomes •Poverty •Homelessness •Stigma •Homophobia •Racism •Education •Availability •Accessibility •Acceptability Community Organizational Societal Social - Hire popular opinion leaders to disseminate acceptance messages amongst their peers - Conduct social marketing campaign about the connection between bullying and HIV NHAS Indicator: Stakeholders: YLMSM, businesses, school officials, public health officials, clergy, government, etc. 35 Here is an example of the next steps completed (Part B): Note: items bold and underlined indicate prioritization Level, Type, This LM shows that the SI will be implemented at the community level The group has decided that this SI will address social factors for the priority population The LM further describes the proposed intervention Return back to previous slide keeping instructions posted for participants

Planning Logic Model for SIs Part C - Identify: Outputs - Should help measure agency activities carried out in intervention to address gaps (hint: AKA process objectives)… Outcomes (intermediate) -Should help measure desired changes in population as a result of intervention (hint: AKA outcome objectives)… NHAS Indicators (long-term) - Choose one of the 10 NHAS Indicators Part C of LM Exercise: Identify: 8) Outputs (HD activities to achieve the intervention) 9) Intermediate Indicators (results of the intervention) 10) Outcome indicator Choose one from the 10 NHAS indicators

NHAS 2020 Indicators: Increase the percentage of people living with HIV who know their serostatus to at least 90% Reduce the number of new diagnoses by at least 25% Reduce the percentage of young gay and bisexual men who have engaged in HIV-risk behaviors by at least 10% Increase the percentage of newly diagnosed persons linked to HIV medical care within one month of their HIV diagnosis to at least 85% Increase the percentage of persons with diagnosed HIV infection who are retained in HIV medical care to at least 90% Increase the percentage of persons with diagnosed HIV infection who are virally suppressed to at least 80 % Decrease the % of persons in HIV medical care who are homeless to 5% or less Decrease the death rate among persons with HIV infection by at least 33% Decrease disparities in the rate of new diagnoses by at least 15% in gay & bisexual men, young Black gay & bisexual men, Black females, and persons living in the Southern US Increase the % of youth and persons who inject drugs with diagnosed HIV infection who are virally suppressed to at least 80% IND.3 Reduce the percentage of young gay and bisexual men who have engaged in HIV-risk behaviors by at least 10 percent. IND 4 Increase the percentage of newly diagnosed persons linked to HIV medical care within one month of their HIV diagnosis to at least 85 percent. IND 5 Increase the percentage of persons with diagnosed HIV infection who are retained in HIV medical care to at least 90 percent. IND 6 Increase the percentage of persons with diagnosed HIV infection who are virally suppressed to at least 80 percent. IND 7 Reduce the percentage of persons in HIV medical care who are homeless to no more than 5 percent. IND 8 Reduce the death rate among persons with diagnosed HIV infection by at least 33 percent. IND 9 Reduce disparities in the rate of new diagnoses by at least 15 percent in the following groups: gay and bisexual men, young Black gay and bisexual men, Black females, and persons living in the Southern United States. IND 10 Increase the percentage of youth and persons who inject drugs with diagnosed HIV infection who are virally suppressed to at least 80 percent.

Relationship between Interventions, Outputs and Outcomes The total activities that are implemented to lead to the outcomes. Outputs (AKA process objectives): Helps describe agency activities (i.e. quantification of activities). Outcome Objectives: Desired changes in the population as a result of the intervention. So let’s review the intervention from the example (read intervention above) How many of you have written objectives before? Although we are not going to write objectives in this course, could this be turned into an objective? Yes, we could develop process and outcome objectives, which help determine outputs and outcomes Go to next slide to review SMART objective

Planning Logic Model Priority Population and Gap in Care/ PrEPContinuum: (HIV Status, Linkage, Engagement-Retention, Med. Adherence, or PrEP Awareness, Uptake, Adherence): Social Determinants 3A’s Level of Intervention SI Type and Description Outputs Outcomes •Poverty •Homelessness •Stigma •Racism •Education •Availability •Acceptability •Accessibility •Community •Organizational •Societal •Economic •Environmental •Social •Policy j• Agency deliverables •Population changes as a result of successful intervention implementation. NHAS Indicator: Stakeholders: 35 This is a template for completing a LM for a SI Many of the headings probably look familiar, as we have covered several of these terms (Review each heading beginning with the Priority population and continuum gap, ending with the NHAS indicators) Now, let’s look at how to complete this Go to next slide

Peer Review of Logic Models What are 3 strengths of the LM? How well does the proposed SI match the prioritized determinants? Is there a logical flow between the 3As, level, and type of SI? What suggestions do you have for improving the LM and SLI plan? Visit www.californiaptc.com for more tools and information.