Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup: Update Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair March 10, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AHRQ Quality Initiatives: Driving System Transformation through Local, Regional and National Collaboration Carolyn M. Clancy, MD Director Agency for Healthcare.
Advertisements

National Quality Strategy Overview August National Quality Strategy Introduction The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires the Secretary of the Department.
National Quality Strategy Overview January 2014 Each slide includes notes that you can access by selecting “View” and then “Notes Page” in PowerPoint.
Engaging Patients and Other Stakeholders in Clinical Research
HIT Policy Committee Federal Health IT Strategic Plan April 13, 2011 Jodi Daniel, ONC Seth Pazinski, ONC.
Interoperability Roadmap Comments Package Implementation, Certification, and Testing (ICT) Workgroup February 13, 2015 Liz Johnson, co-chair Cris Ross,
ELTSS Alignment to Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap DRAFT: For Stakeholder Consideration in response to public comment.
Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup: Roadmap Charge Overview Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair.
Campus Improvement Plans
Decision Making Tools for Strategic Planning 2014 Nonprofit Capacity Conference Margo Bailey, PhD April 21, 2014 Clarify your strategic plan hierarchy.
Creating Better Health and Care Services An overview of a Better Health and Care Review process.
Healthy Child Development Suggestions for Submitting a Strong Proposal.
Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup April 7, 2015 Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair.
Better, Smarter, Healthier Delivery System Reform Presentation to the Health IT Policy Committee March 10, 2015 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Connecting Health and Care for the Nation: A Shared Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap – DRAFT Version 1.0 Joint FACA Meeting Chartese February 10, 2015.
Compassion. Action. Change. Recommendations for County PEI Funded Activities in Phase II as of June 2015 CalMHSA Board of Directors Meeting June 11, 2015.
This presentation contains notes. Select View, then Notes page to read them. National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report Chartbook on Healthy Living.
Linette T Scott, MD, MPH Chief Medical Information Officer, DHCS “Population Health” HIMSS NCal Educational Program, Sacramento, CA| February 4, 2014.
Keith J. Mueller, Ph.D. Director, RUPRI Center for Rural Health Policy Analysis Head, Department of Health Management and Policy College of Public Health.
HIT Policy Committee Accountable Care Workgroup – Kickoff Meeting May 17, :00 – 2:00 PM Eastern.
Strategy and Innovation Workgroup: Recommendations on the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan March 4, 2015 David Lansky, Chair Jennifer Covich,
National Standards for Safer Better Healthcare
Affordable Care Act Section 3004 Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Quality Reporting Program Provider Training Caroline D. Gallaher, R.N., B.S.N, J.D.
© 2012, The Brookings Institution Current Directions in Quality Measurement Barbara Gage, PhD Fellow, Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings.
Live Healthy Napa County Creating and Sustaining a Common Agenda.
ORIENTATION SESSION Strengthening Chronic Disease Prevention & Management.
The Business Case for Bidirectional Integrated Care: Mental Health and Substance Use Services in Primary Care Settings and Primary Care Services in Specialty.
Incentives & Outcomes Committee Draft Recommendations Public Employer Health Purchasing Committee October 25, 2010.
Session 5 Integrating CLAS Into Policy and Practice CLAS Training [ADD DATE] [ADD PRESENTER NAME] [ADD ORGANIZATION NAME]
Health IT Policy Committee Federal Health IT Strategic Plan September 9, 2015.
2004 National Oral Health Conference Strategic Planning for Oral Health Programs B.J. Tatro, MSSW, PhD B.J. Tatro Consulting Scottsdale, Arizona.
Interoperability Updates -National Interoperability Roadmap 8/20/2014 Erica Galvez, ONC Interoperability Portfolio Manager.
Toolkit for Mainstreaming HIV and AIDS in the Education Sector Guidelines for Development Cooperation Agencies.
NIEM Domain Awareness June 2011 Establishing a Domain within NIEM.
Larry Wolf, chair Marc Probst, co-chair Certification / Adoption Workgroup March 19, 2014.
Crosswalk of Public Health Accreditation and the Public Health Code of Ethics Highlighted items relate to the Water Supply case studied discussed in the.
Managing Advanced Illness to Advance Care Executive Briefing - AHA Annual Meeting Tuesday, April 30, :45am – 12:15pm © 2012 American Hospital Association.
HIT Policy Committee NHIN Workgroup Recommendations Phase 2 David Lansky, Chair Pacific Business Group on Health Danny Weitzner, Co-Chair Department of.
Public Health Tiger Team we will start the meeting 3 min after the hour DRAFT Project Charter April 15, 2014.
10/27/111 Longitudinal Care Work Group (LCWG) Proposal to Re-Scope and Re-Name the LTPAC WG.
Health Promotion as a Quality issue
Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup June 23, 2015 Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair.
Maine State Innovation Model (SIM) August 2, 2013.
Moving Outside the Boundaries of the Doctor's Office: Empowering Patients with Technology.
Health IT and ONC: Furthering Transformation Across the Care Continuum in Support of People with Disabilities, Older Adults, and Caregivers Jodi Daniel,
PATIENT-CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH INSTITUTE PCORI Board of Governors Meeting Washington, DC September 24, 2012 Anne Beal, MD, MPH, Chief Operating Officer.
National Strategy for Quality Improvement in Health Care June 15, 2011 Kana Enomoto Director Office of Policy, Planning, and Innovation.
A Journey Together: New Maryland Healthcare Landscape Baltimore County Forum Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission June 2015.
Presentation to the SAMHSA Advisory Councils
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
DISPARITIES COUNCIL Legislative Working Group Hank J. Porten Steve Shestakofsky Camille Watson.
1 Strategic Plan Review. 2 Process Planning and Evaluation Committee will be discussing 2 directions per meeting. October meeting- Finance and Governance.
Delaware PCMH Initiative October Rationale for PCMH Better health quality and outcomes Better health quality and outcomes Lower health care costs.
Linking the learning to the National Standards for Safer Better Healthcare Joan Heffernan Inspector Manager Regulation – Healthcare Health Information.
Nevada State Innovation Model (SIM) Delivery System and Payment Alignment May 6,
Pharmacists’ Patient Care Process
Prepared by: Forging a Comprehensive Initiative to Improve Birth Outcomes and Reduce Infant Mortality in [State] Adapted from AMCHP Birth Outcomes Compendium.
Creating an Interoperable Learning Health System for a Healthy Nation Jon White, M.D. Acting Deputy National Coordinator Office of the National Coordinator.
Overview of ONC Report to Congress on Health Information Blocking Presented to the Health IT Policy Committee, Task Force on Clinical, Technical, Organizational,
Electronic Clinical Quality Measures – Session #1 ONC Resource Center.
Primary Care Improvement Infrastructure: The Role of Practice Facilitation Michael L. Parchman, MD MPH MacColl Center for Health Care Innovation AHRQ Annual.
ACWG Charge Make recommendations to the Health IT Policy Committee on how HHS policies and programs can advance the evolution of a health IT infrastructure.
NFM: Modular Template Measurement Framework: Modules, Interventions and Indicators LFA M&E Training February
Resource Review for Teaching Resource Review for Teaching Victoria M. Rizzo, LCSW-R, PhD Jessica Seidman, LMSW Columbia University School of Social Work.
National Quality Strategy Overview March 2016 Each slide includes notes that you can access by selecting “View” and then “Notes Page” in PowerPoint. Please.
Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup February 17, 2015 Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair.
National Priorities Partnership © Aligning Efforts to Make Care Safe, Effective & Affordable.
Digital Health Solutions for Vulnerable Populations: Addressing the Needs of Vulnerable Populations through Digital Innovation June
Health IT Policy Committee Workgroup Evolution
Finance & Planning Committee of the San Francisco Health Commission
Presentation transcript:

Draft – discussion only Advanced Health Models and Meaningful Use Workgroup: Update Paul Tang, chair Joe Kimura, co-chair March 10, 2015

Roadmap Use Case Prioritization Charge 1.Develop a repeatable process that identifies the priority use cases that would have the greatest impact on triple aim goals of healthier people/communities, better care, and more affordable care. 2.Illustrate the process by refining the material contained in Appendix H of the Roadmap into a set of prioritized use cases. Appendix H contains a list of goals, ideas, and recommendations for nationwide interoperability submitted to ONC by federal, and other public and private stakeholders prior to release of the draft Roadmap. 3.Recommend a set of actors who should be involved in the prioritization process and in maintaining the list of priority uses cases. 2

Use Cases Overview A use case is a descriptive statement that defines a scope (or boundary), interactions (or relationships) and specific roles played by actors (or stakeholders) to achieve a goal. The methodology is commonly used to support the identification of requirements and is a simple way to describe the functionalities or needs of an organization. A defined prioritization process should help refine and prioritize a list of use cases to inform priorities for the development of technical standards, policies and implementation specifications. 3

Workgroup Process to Date 1.The WG reached initial agreement on overall prioritization framework and process. 2.Subset of WG members individually reviewed and selected top 15 of 56 the 56 interoperability goals in the Roadmap as priorities based on expected Triple Aim impact. 3.ONC aggregated members’ individual top 15 lists and ratings. 4.The complete WG reviewed & discussed the aggregated priorities. 5.The complete WG discussed limitations of the selected priorities and best approaches to combine/edit/focus the language to produce appropriate use cases. 4

Example of Impact Prioritization Exercise 5 ID“Raw” Roadmap Use Case Priorit y VotesRevision CommentsHealthCareCostTotal 5 Authorized providers, caregivers and population health stakeholders are able to access and use pertinent population health data from all applicable sources (aggregate and individual patient level data) to support population health measurement and management. 9 Depends upon patient identity and standardized data Duplicative with use cases #50 and #51?

Next Steps Members will revise and edit 15 remaining use cases to ensure the final set: – Has all the elements necessary for a complete use case (users, relationships, outcomes). – Is focused on interoperability. – Is representative of variety of domains. Members will test each case using the complete set of criteria and refine the process based on this experience. 6

Complete Process Overview 7 I. Triple Aim II. Programmatic Needs III. Operational Readiness IV. Beneficiaries V. Deliverable: Objective Assessment, Priorities Transparent Rationale IV. Strategic Prioritization Prioritization Elements Outputs Complete List of Submitted Use Cases Prioritized Short list of Use Cases Advanced Health Model Input Program Timelines & Policy Input Operational Impacts & Adoption Input Integrated Assessment HHS Final Strategic Decisions

Conceptual Overview of Prioritization Elements 8 Readiness Impact/Value of Use Case Prioritized Use Cases A.Use Case A B.Use Case B C.Use Case C D.… Low hanging fruit Gap in Policies or Standards Which use cases would be most impactful on triple aim goals? Priorities for policy and standards work

I. Prioritization Element: Impact 9 Objective Consider how important the use case is to make progress on triple aim goals. Criteria Detail Healthy People/Healthy Communities: Improve the health of the U.S. population by supporting proven interventions to address behavioral, social and, environmental determinants of health in addition to delivering higher-quality care. Better Care: Improve the overall quality, by making health care more patient-centered, reliable, accessible, and safe. Affordable Care: Reduce the cost of quality health care for individuals, families, employers, and government. Evaluation Determine a value from 1 – 3 for each aim to derive a score from 0 – 9.

II. Prioritization Element: Programmatic Need 10 Objective Consider the timeframe in which the use case is needed to support key national goals. Criteria Detail National Quality Strategy Priorities Safety. Making care safer by reducing harm caused in the delivery of care Patient Engagement. Ensuring that each person and family is engaged as partners in their care. Care Coordination. Promoting effective communication and coordination of care. Prevention. Promoting the most effective prevention and treatment practices for the leading causes of mortality, starting with cardiovascular disease Community. Working with communities to promote wide use of best practices to enable healthy living. Affordable. Making quality care more affordable for individuals, families, employers, and governments by developing and spreading new health care delivery models. HHS Goals Better care, Smarter spending, Healthier people HHS Delivery System Reform Goals 30% of Medicare payments through alt. payment models by 2016, 50% by % of FFS payments linked to quality and value by 2018 Interoperability Roadmap 2015 – Year: Send, receive find and use common clinical data set 2018 – Year: Expand interoperability and HIT users to improve health and lower cost 2021 – 2024 – 10 year: Achieve a nationwide learning health system Evaluation Rate impact on each need as “0” (no impact), “-” (minimal impact), or “+” (large impact).

III. Prioritization Element: Readiness 11 Objective Consider current barriers or facilitators affecting widespread adoption of the use case. Criteria Detail Business and Cultural Environment. Is there a clear business case supporting adoption of the use case? Will stakeholders be receptive to the use case or reluctant to adopt? Technical Environment. Are the standards needed to support the use case available and mature? How much effort will be required to advance standards relative to current state? What key dependencies in the broader technology environment will help or hinder adoption? Stakeholder Cost/Benefit Considerations. What financial, opportunity, and time costs will stakeholders need to incur in order to adopt the use case? How will adoption of the use case impact provider experience? Policy Environment. Does the current policy environment (e.g. payment and privacy policy) support or hinder adoption of the use case? Is adoption contingent on any major policy dependencies? Evaluation Determine a value from 1 – 3 for each readiness factor reflecting the degree to which the factor will support use case adoption, i.e. from “1” (minimal readiness to support adoption) to “3” (factor is highly supportive of adoption).

IV. Prioritization Element: Beneficiaries 12 Objective Identify the stakeholder(s) that are the primary beneficiaries of adoption of the use case. Criteria Detail 1.Consumer/Patient 2.Community 3.Provider 4.Public Health 5.Research 6.Payer Evaluation Rate significance of impact on each beneficiary as “0” (not relevant), “-” (minor beneficiary), or “+” (primary beneficiary).

Outputs 13 V. Workgroup Deliverable Transparently conveys logic of prioritization process Opportunity for WG to provide additional context: What are critical dependencies for the use case? How will adoption of the use case accelerate other priorities? What are major areas of effort needed to support adoption of use case? VI. Strategic Prioritization Leadership evaluates results of objective assessment Determines resource allocation and timing based on consideration of current strategic priorities.

QUESTIONS 14