Chris Beuning Medical Informatics 404 June 29, 2011

 Private, not-for-profit health system  Established in 1908  Several locations in Seattle area – main campus in downtown Seattle

 Chair  Nancy J Auer, M.D.  Members – Teresa Bigelow  Don Brennan  John Connors  Isiaah Crawford  Ned Flohr  Cheryl Gossman  William Krippaehne, Jr.  Louise L Liang  Chuck Lytle  Kirby McDonald  John Nordstrom  David Olsen  Martin Siegel  Janet True  Todd Strumwasser

 Emergency Medicine Physician  Greater than 30 years at Swedish  Chief Medical Officer  Chief of Staff  Medical Director of Emergency Services  Vice President of Medical Affairs  Retired 2010  Currently consulting on medical leadership issues

 Broad range of professionals  Medical  Non-medical  Legal/Government  Teresa Bigelow  Janet True  Executive/Business  Don Brennan  John Connors  Ned Flohr  William Krippaehne, Jr.  Cheryl Gossman  Louise L. Liang  Chuck Lytle  Kirby McDonald  John Nordstrom  David Olsen

 Higher Education  Isiaah Crawford  Medical  Martin Siegel  Todd Strumwasser

 Desirable Board Member Qualities  Familiarity with the community  Familiarity with business decisions  Available time  A record of success  Reputation

 Member Reasons to Participate  Satisfaction of a “Samaritan Need”  Pride in professional achievement  Public recognition with associated commercial opportunities

 Mission – to provide compassionate, high- quality patient care that meets the caring and cost effective expectations of our patients, physicians, employees and volunteers, and to preserve and strengthen the Swedish tradition of community service.  Vision – to become the provider of choice for healthcare services for our community. We will differentiate ourselves through our centers of excellence

 Constant Courtesy  Patient Satisfaction  Teamwork and Respect  Professionalism  Personal Responsibility

 Review mission – suggest changes as appropriate based on culture and industry changes  Review all proposals and topics in context with that mission and suggest changes to improve consistency.

 Mission is the central purpose of stakeholder collaboration  The mission is to be one of humanities highest callings  Upholding of the mission makes work in the HCO attractive

 Description – The balanced Scorecard is a strategic planning and management system used extensively in business and industry. It has more recently been used in healthcare  Why it’s important – This tool helps compare a healthcare organization to national benchmarks to identify opportunities for improvement as well as marketing the HCO to customers, payers and potential employees/employed providers.  Performance – for the first four measures Swedish’s performance is better than the national, however the numbers are ext  How do they manage for success and quality

Measurement (Per 1000 Discharges) SwedishNational Benchmark Foreign Object Retained after Surgery00.09 Air Embolism Blood Incompatibility Pressure Ulcer Stages III and IV Falls and Trauma Vascular Catheter-Associated Infections Catheter Associated UTI Manifestations of Poor Glycemic Control00.05

 Reflection of these measures for the health care organization  Most of the measures compared did so favorably for Swedish compared to national benchmarks  Four of the eight measure did indicate room for improvement  Profitability  No published scorecard or comparison measures available  Information on HCO website is favorable

 President and Chief Executive Officer  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer  Chief Strategic Officer  Vice President, Swedish Physician Division  Chief Information Officer  Chief Medical Officer  Chief Legal Counsel  Executive Director, Foundation and Vice President of Development  Vice President, External Affairs  Vice President, Human Resources

 Last Report  Fully accredited by Washington State Department of Health  The Joint Commission (The JC) formerly JCAHO  Commission on Cancer  Board’s reaction  Endorsement of findings  Review of any findings no matter how minor  Set strategy for addressing any findings

 Consideration of requests in relation to Mission, Vision and Values  Strategy Approval  Scope Approval  Funding  Prioritization  Review of Progress and Outcomes