Results of the group discussions with elderly on needs of users Results Dutch Telecare Review Business case: update October 2010 ? Overview

Three group talks 12 to 30 participants Open invitation to inhabitants of Pantein serviced homes Results questionnaire were recognized New group of participants Video of proposed technology shown Criticism about housing and existing technology and service Talking to the future users

Group talks: technology Unresolved issues blocking cooperation In some complexes no DSL possible due to phone exchange Difficulties with existing technology (sunscreens, elevators, ventilation, automatic lights, doors, etc.) Complaints are not communicated upon (and often not resolved) Older telecare experiments left a bad reputation for technology (it didn't work properly 8 years ago) User see Pantein as integrated not as divisions

Group talks: technology Conclusion (1) People have no reference to the technology: demonstrate Best contact persons are janitor and facility coordinator First recognize (and fix) existing problems technology Make a thorough inventory of DSL possibilities in homes People are willing to switch provider (triple play) for benefits Privacy is not an issue, service and reliability is

Group talks: technology Conclusion (2) Communication is essential: manage expectations Information channel only if it is new info or a better overview Video communication must be experienced before appraisal Technology must work 100% Detailed agreements on entering scenarios at alarms Transparent pricing of telecare elements Pilots most be free of charge (bonus for participating)

Literature study and interviews with key players Success and failure factors identified in 3 areas: Implementation Project management Business model Dutch Telecare Review

Implementation: failure factors Regulations are not compatible with innovation of technology Users are not being involved: est. needs, designing, etc. Care workers see it as threat to and impoverishment of care Technology often not reliable No continuation plan: after pilot it falls apart

Dutch Telecare Review Implementation: success factors Users like the social aspects of video communication Users see privacy as a medium of exchange for safety Users ask more during e-consults Users will use services they didn't expect to use at the start Users are prepared to pay after they have experienced added value Safety features are most wanted, convenience remote 2nd Showing benefits are greater than costs

Dutch Telecare Review Project management: failure factors Projects are complicated to oversee / manage No clear allocation of responsibilities between parties No chain responsibility (“my part is OK”) Project management: success factors Enlarging the scale through cooperation

Dutch Telecare Review Business model: failure factors Not investing enough to make it work No structural funding or profitmodel No transparent cost overview for user Products are reliant on single/few supplier Business model: success factors Saving cost with open source software Standing out as care organization by providing e-health

October 2010 Where are we in the development of the Dutch businesscase? Business case

We have described the way we want to develop the BC We investigated literature, questionaires and interviews We made first attempts to list features of a Dutch BC We researched possible revenues and funding for telecare/health, seem to have balanced budget We found a partner that tackled most of the threats from our research of failure factors We are defining services beneficial to different user groups We are defining a phased strategy for implementation Business case: pro's

Some of the funding ends in a year Structural funding is in the making (2012) Uncertain which services will be in that structural funding Content from local partners is still bottleneck Technology is developing quickly risk of dialectics of progress Business case: con's

Eric Schlangen HabiPro – E: – T: Questions?