Vidant July 21 st, 2015 Laura Edwards Joanne Rinker.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Advertisements

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) and
Medicaid Division of Medicaid and Long-Term Care Department of Health and Human Services Managed Long-Term Services and Supports.
Standards Definition of standards Types of standards Purposes of standards Characteristics of standards How to write a standard Alexandria University Faculty.
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
POLK STATE COLLEGE PRIOR LEARNING ASSESSMENT PORTFOLIO DEVELOPMENT
Campus Improvement Plans
Samuel Steel Safety Group Meeting Four November 14, 2013 Samuel Safety Systems.
Quality Improvement/ Quality Assurance Amelia Broussard, PhD, RN, MPH Christopher Gibbs, JD, MPH.
Continuing Competence For North Carolina Nurses
Section 5 Next Steps Continue Learning How will you: – Expand your knowledge base? – Keep up with new developments in diabetes care? 157.
Final Determinations. Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information.
Service Agency Accreditation Recognizing Quality Educational Service Agencies Mike Bugenski
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
1 Faculty of Public Health Continuing Professional Development Scheme.
Quality Improvement Projects for MOC MOC Credit for the Work You Do Every Day * Additional notes added by CPQCC.
EMS Auditing Definitions
A Brief overview of the Standards to support learning and assessment in practice. Nursing and Midwifery Council (2006) Standard to Support Learning and.
1-800-DIABETES diabetes.org EDUCATION RECOGNITION UPDATE EDUCATION RECOGNITION 2008 March 26, 2008 Presented by: Terry Unger, BS, RD, CDE Associate Director,
PHAB's Approach to Internal and External Evaluation Jessica Kronstadt | Director of Research and Evaluation | November 18, 2014 APHA 2014 Annual Meeting.
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
CBAP and BABOK Presented to the Albany Capital District Chapter of the IIBA February 3, 2009.
Quality Improvement Prepeared By Dr: Manal Moussa.
Conducting the IT Audit
Presented by Joanne Roberts, PHN, PSC Los Angeles County November 2, 2011 Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) and Quality Assurance (QA)
Grantwriting. Types of Grants Foundation Grants HancockREADS Grants Hancock Education Fund Grants.
Title I Technical Assistance Training Federal and State Programs.
Organization Mission Organizations That Use Evaluative Thinking Will Develop mission statements specific enough to provide a basis for goals and.
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
InAHQ Annual Education Meeting Indianapolis, Indiana April 29, 2010
Safety Groups Program 2009 Start of Year. Agenda Safety Group Objectives Safety Group Program Requirements 3 rd edition Employer Guidelines / Element.
CERTIFICATION In the Electronics Recycling Industry © 2007 IAER Web Site - -
HP Provider Relations October 2011 Medical Review Team.
MYP Pre-authorisation Report April 12-13, 2010 Recommendations Summary Professional Development Day May 17 th 2010.
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION © 2010 AdvancED.
Assuring Safety for Clinical Techniques and Procedures MODULE 5 Facilitative Supervision for Quality Improvement Curriculum 2008.
1 NCLB Title Program Monitoring NCLB Title Program Monitoring Regional Training SPRING 2006.
Managing Your Professional Development. Session Objectives You will know how to:  Identify key steps in the Professional Development Portfolio process.
SACS Compliance Certification Orientation Meeting June 23, 2008.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
Program Implementation MM.DD.YY. To comply with the OHSA and regulations To demonstrate management's commitment to health and safety To show employees.
BEGINNING EDUCATOR INDUCTION PROGRAM MEETING CCSD Professional Development Mrs. Jackie Miller Dr. Shannon Carroll August 6, 2014.
New Title I Designee Training September 17,
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
Continuous Improvement. Focus of the Review: Continuous Improvement The unit will engage in continuous improvement between on-site visits. Submit annual.
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Program Assessment Technical Assistance Meetings December 2009.
District Accreditation Completing the Standards Assessment Report July 20, 2010.
Onsite Quarterly Meeting SIPP PIPs June 13, 2012 Presenter: Christy Hormann, LMSW, CPHQ Project Leader-PIP Team.
1 Community-Based Care Readiness Assessment and Peer Review Overview Department of Children and Families And Florida Mental Health Institute.
Wisconsin Administrative Code PI 34 1 Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction - Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Support from a Professional.
NH Department of Education Developing the School Improvement Plan Required by NH RSA 193-H and Federal Public Law for Schools in Need of Improvement.
Individual Work Plan (IWP). Objectives Describe the purpose of the Individual Work Plan (IWP) Discuss when to submit an IWP The IWP as a living document.
Documentation Requirements for Hospital Accreditation -By Global Manager Group.
Standards and Competencies for Cancer Chemotherapy Nursing Practice in Canada: CANO/ACIO AN INTRODUCTION.
Accident Investigation SGRP CD Slide # Meeting 1 Northern Ontario Safety Group.
CHILDREN OF PRISONERS PARTNERSHIP What is the Children of Prisoners (CP) Partnership? The CP Partnership is a funding project between PFI and selected.
Training for organisations participating in Peer Review of Paediatric Diabetes.
INSETA ASSESSOR- MODERATOR REGISTRATION PROCESSES.
Performance-Based Accreditation
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Cosmetic Dermatologic Surgery Fellowship Accreditation Program
Understanding VPNPP Advancement
The Federal programs department September 26, 2017
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
“DRESS” for Battle- How to Survive a DSMES Program Audit
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013
Presentation transcript:

Vidant July 21 st, 2015 Laura Edwards Joanne Rinker

VIDANT Diabetes Initiative  Locations: Winsor Tarboro Greenville Wallace Washington County (5 possible clinics-little Washington) Nags Head

Meeting Dates  July 21st: DSME Requirements  August 26th: Application process  September 23rd: Billing meeting with billing specialist  Sept 30th: Site audits and scheduling audit visits (6 visits scheduled the week of Oct 26-29th)  Dates TBD: Meeting 4 and 5: Present data and findings and present 3 sites per meeting. (Before Christmas 2015, basically November and December)  Date TBD: Meeting 6: Go live: Application by network or if they set up their own, application for the new network completed.  Date TBD: Meeting 7: Billing session on how to integrate

ADA/AADE: Agree on 5 Evidence Based principles  Diabetes education is effective for improving clinical outcomes and quality of life, at least in the short term.  DSME has evolved from primarily didactic presentations to more theoretically based empowerment models  There is no one “best” education or approach; however, programs incorporating behavioral and psychosocial strategies demonstrate improved outcomes.  Additional studies show that age- and culturally appropriate programs improve outcomes and that group education is effective.  Ongoing support is crucial to sustain progress made by participants during DSME programs.10,20,26,27 Behavioral goal setting is an effective strategy to support self management behaviors.28 Source:

ADA/AADE: AADE  TITLE: Diabetes Education Accreditation Program (DEAP)  Initial Application-3 steps  Online application with stop/ start option (does not have to be completed in one sitting), paper application also available  Submit supporting documents within 2 weeks  Complete a telephone interview or onsite audit with AADE DEAP staff or DEAP auditor(s) after fee, application, and supporting materials are received.  Initial and Renewal Application Fees:  $ for all programs  Community Sites - free (maximum 10)  Branch Locations - $ per location (maximum 30) ADA  TITLE: Education Recognition Program (ERP): 7th Edition  Online application-2 steps  Only available online, must be completed in one sitting  Submit supporting documentation within 2 weeks  Initial and Renewal Application Fees:  $1, for first program  Expansion and multi-sites - $ per location  No max

ADA/AADE: AADE: Supporting Documentation  Program description, including mission, goals, and organization chart  Job descriptions for each of the positions within the entity’s organization  Resumes of coordinator and instructors  Proof of licenses and/or certification and acceptable continuing education (CE) credits related to diabetes for coordinator and all instructors  Performance measurement plan/continuous quality improvement (CQI) process  Copy of one de-identified chart  Copy of one complete section from the curriculum or the curriculum outline  Advisory group composition  Sample education materials (English and non-English as appropriate) ADA: Supporting Documentation  Documented evidence of Sponsoring Organizational support  Copies of or verification of program coordinator and professional instructor’s current credentials (CDR card or verification of CDR for RDs) to include verification of CDE or BC-ADM if applicable.  Copy of official certificate or verification of 15 continuing education credits if the coordinator or professional instructional staff do not hold a current CDE or BC-ADM.  Paper Audit Items: (Note all four required for new or original applicants; one randomly assigned for renewing/additional site applicants)  Documentation of Advisory Group activity including quality input obtain from group within 12 months prior to the application submission.  A full section of one assigned content area of the curriculum (please see above for required elements for each section or content area of the curriculum).  A description of a CQI project based on at least one of standard 9’s aggregated program outcomes (patient behavioral goal outcomes or other participant outcomes)using a formal plan/process.  A copy of one de-identified participant chart demonstrating the complete education process.  Payment

ADA/AADE: AADE: Renewal Process  Same three steps as initial application  Submit re- accreditation application  Submit support documentation  10% (of re- accreditation applications) randomly selected for onsite audit ADA: Renewal Process  Same two steps as initial application  Support documentation  Licenses and certificates of instructors  Proof of CE credits for noncertified staff  Only one of four possible audit items sent with initial application (randomly determined by computer)

ADA/AADE: AADE: Process timeline  No data collection period  No minimum number of patients in program  Copy of one de-identified chart representative of the target population and education process  Total application process: 4–6 weeks  Eligible to submit Medicare claims as of date of approval  Valid for 4 years  Must complete status updates and annual status reports ADA: Process Timeline  There can be no more than 3 months from the end of the reporting period to the date of the online application submission. A minimum of 1 patient must have been completed the education process in the specified reporting period at each site except at an expansion site.  Original Applications: (new programs) the reporting period can start up to 6 months prior to the online application submission date and be 1 month up to 6 months in length.  Renewal Applications: the reporting period can start up to 12 months prior to the online application submission date and can be 1 month to 12 months in length.  Application is processed by ADA staff within 30 days  Approval is retroactive to date of online application submission (for billing eligibility)  Valid for 4 years  Must complete annual status report

ADA/AADE: AADE: Support Services  Support by telephone,  DEAP e-community  Free online podcast and Web cast  Online tools and sample documents  Accredited programs posted on AADE web site  Program coordinator complimentary one year AADE membership ADA: Support Services  Support by telephone,  Monthly conference calls  Web casts (free)  Free online library of sample forms and other tools (e.g., CQI plan, curriculum format)  Recognized programs listed on ADA website  40% discount on publications  Chronicle on-line patient EMR  Living Well with Diabetes (50 English/Spanish/year)

ADA/AADE: AADE: Audits  5% of initial applications annually  10% of currently accredited programs annually  10% of programs seeking re- accreditation annually  2 weeks’ notice  Volunteer auditors (1–2 per audit site) ADA: Audits  5% annually (up to 70/year)  2 weeks’ notice  Volunteer auditors (2 per audit site)  Concerns poster must be posted

Comparison By Standard (2012)  Standard 1: The provider(s) of DSME will document an organizational structure, mission statement, and goals. For those providers working within a larger organization, that organization will recognize and support quality DSME as an integral component of diabetes care  Summary of differences: There are minor differences. AADE requires a written policy and procedure relating to the program and education process as well as a letter of support. ADA does not require written policies or procedures but does require a letter of support for the program.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 2: The provider(s) of DSME will seek ongoing input from external stakeholders and experts in order to promote program quality  Summary of differences: AADE requires a policy (document) to be in place to guide the advisory group. ADA requires membership documentation according to the standards and requires that for a program taught by a single discipline, at least a member of the other disciplines serve on the advisory group.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 3: The provider(s) of DSME will determine who to serve, how best to deliver diabetes education to that population, and what resources can provide ongoing support for that population  There are no differences. There shall be documentation of: 1. A needs assessment for the target population 2. The availability of resources to meet these educational needs

Comparison By Standard  Standard 4: A coordinator will be designated to oversee the DSME program. The coordinator will have oversight responsibility for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of education services.  Summary of differences: no differences. Both require a resume, documentation of 15 hours or CDE, BC-ADM cert and job description

Comparison By Standard  Standard 5: One or more instructors will provide DSME and, when applicable, DSMS. At least one of the instructors responsible for designing and planning DSME and DSMS will be a registered nurse, registered dietitian, or pharmacist with training and experience pertinent to DSME, or another professional with certification in diabetes care and education, such as a CDE or BC-ADM. Other health workers can contribute to DSME and provide DSMS with appropriate training in diabetes and with supervision and support.

Standard 5 Continued  Summary of differences: ADA has more specific criteria for programs that are taught by only one discipline; If so, there must be a policy in place that addresses how the education needs of a patient will be met if they are outside the scope of practice and/or expertise of the single discipline.  AADE states that mechanisms must be in place for ensuring that patient needs are met related to the scope of practice. It also requires documenting of reporting and supervisory relationship of CHWs and of which staff have nontechnical, nonclinical roles. AADE requires detail on CHW training, CE, and name of instructor.  ADA does not require additional documentation about training or CEs for CHWs.  AADE requires proof of continuing education credits for all instructors including those with CDE or BC-ADM. ADA requires written documentation and copies of continuing education credits for non-CDE staff. There is a difference between ADA and AADE with respect to the timing of continuing education credit acquisition. AADE requires 15 hours annually, which can be for a calendar year, and ADA requires all continuing education credits to be earned within 12 months prior to the online application date.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 6: A written curriculum reflecting current evidence and practice guidelines, with criteria for evaluating outcomes, will serve as the framework for the provision of DSME. The needs of the individual participant will determine which parts of the curriculum will be provided to that individual.  Summary of differences: AADE supports a behavior-change focus curriculum package that includes assessment, implementation, evaluation of outcomes demonstrated in the AADE7, and self-care behaviors appropriate for patient and target population. AADE requires updates utilizing current evidence and practice guidelines. ADA specifies annual review of curriculum so that it is up to date with all 10 content areas covered.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 7: The diabetes self-management, education, and support needs of each participant will be assessed by one or more instructors. The participant and instructor(s) will then together develop an individualized education and support plan focused on behavior change  Summary of differences: There are no significant differences. AADE requests de-identified chart, review for collaborative goal setting, and an educational process policy to ensure that a consistent process is in place. Both require documentation. ADA emphasizes demonstration of the educational process.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 8: The participant and instructor(s) will together develop a personalized follow-up plan for ongoing self-management support. The participant’s outcomes and goals and the plan for ongoing self- management support will be communicated to other members of the health care team.  Summary of differences: There are no significant differences. AADE requires a written policy for personalized process and ongoing self-management support strategies to ensure that a consistent process is in place (part of the record/chart review). ADA emphasizes that documentation of actual planning for support services must be in place, not just a policy (DSMS Plan).

Comparison By Standard  Standard 9: The provider(s) of DSME and DSMS will monitor whether participants are achieving their personal diabetes self-management goals and other outcome(s) as a way to evaluate the effectiveness of the educational intervention(s), using appropriate measurement techniques.  Summary of differences: ADA’s indicators for this standard are concise; auditors would only look to see if there was a collection and summary of behavioral goals as well as one other outcome. AADE’s requirement is to have a policy in place to ensure consistent care regardless of staff providing care (part of record/chart review). ADA emphasizes the importance of acknowledging the distinction between tracking outcomes and conducting a continuous quality improvement (CQI) process.

Comparison By Standard  Standard 10: The provider(s) of DSME will measure the effectiveness of the education and support and look for ways to improve any identified gaps in services or service quality using a systematic review of process and outcome data.  Summary of differences: There are no significant differences. AADE specifically advises that CQI results be shared with the advisory group. ADA emphasizes the plan, process, and application

Checklists  ADA Checklist: 15%20ERP/initial-application-checklist.pdf 15%20ERP/initial-application-checklist.pdf  AADE Checklist: source/legacy- docs/_resources/pdf/accred/Supporting_Documents _CheckList-2013.pdf

Where do we go from here? Questions?