Transcript LC - NNPHI

WASHINGTON STATE
BUILDING QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT
LESSONS LEARNED
Rita Schmidt
Department of Health
Jane Lee
Department of Health
POPULATIONS SERVED
Whatcom
193,100
San Juan
Okanogan
Skagit
16,300
Ferry
Pend
Stevens Oreille
7,800
44,000 12,900
Northeast
Tri County
40,500
118,900
Island
Clallam
80,300
704,300
Jefferson
Kitsap
37,600
Seattle - King
247,600
Mason
Kittitas
Tacoma - Pierce
Thurston
249,800
Pacific
21,800
Wahkiakum
Lincoln
Spokane
10,450
465,000
Adams
Whitman
18,000
43,300
1,909,300
56,800
71,200
4,100
72,600
Chelan -Douglas
29,000
Grays Harbor
6,668,200
Snohomish
69,500
39,900
Grant
86,100
813,600
Lewis
Yakima
75,200
238,400
Cowlitz
99,600
Clark
431,200
Garfield
2,250
Columbia
72,700
4,100
Asotin
Walla Walla
21,500
169,300
Benton - Franklin
59,200
Skamania
10,800
Washington State
Total Population
April 2009
Klickitat
20,200
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT DEVELOPMENT





1993 Public Health Improvement Partnership Lawlanguage promotes performance improvement
1995-2010 Development of Public Health
Standards and Measurement Processes
2005-6 MLC 1 Projects for improvement on
Standards using QI strategies
2007-8 MLC 2 QI Projects and Collaborations
2008-11 MLC 3 QI Collaboration-three target
areas
BUILDING BLOCKS FOR
IMPROVING PERFORMANCE
HEALTH INDICATORS
- How healthy are we?
- How does our health compare to others?
- What specific problems could we address
Population level data
STANDARDS AND MEASURES
- What should a health department be able to do?
- Do we provide basic expected functions?
- How do we compare to others?
- Where do we need to improve?
System/organization level data
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS –
PROGRAM/SERVICE BASED
- How can we improve the work we do, that will result
in better health or protection?
ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES
- What does local public health do and how is it done?
Example: Number of food safety inspections,
WIC clients served, health assessments conducted
Service-level data
Levels of QI Integration




Level 1- No interest or activities
Level 2- Awareness, interest and one-time projects
Level 3- Multiple teams and QI tools, but no repetition
or saturation
Level 4- Specific QI model integrated into agency
management structure with continuous
improvement
Bill Riley and Russell Brewer
MLC 1 -Awareness and one time projects

QI Projects
Improvements that address results from the 2005
Performance Assessment
 System –wide improvement priority to:
Identify goals, objectives, and performance measures and
establish regular monitoring, reporting, and use of results




QI Training-one day, additional day of consultation on
site
Funding-$4000 for 3 system wide projects
6 Months follow-up phone calls
QI Projects





Grant County -All the Standards related to Access
Cowlitz- Improvement in performance and processes on all standards
that apply to Child and Family Health
Garfield County - All the Standards that apply to the Immunizations
Program
Tacoma Pierce County- Quality Improvement processes and plan
DOH Office of the Secretary- Quality Improvement processes and
plan
Lessons Learned
Money matters
 Follow-up can make a big difference
 Teaching how to build infrastructure
creates sustainability-Quality Councils
 Building infrastructure works better if
there is continuity of staff

MLC 2- Multiple Teams, tools, no repetition

QI Projects funded
Focus: Improvement identified in the 2005 assessment
 QI training, and coaching


Collaborative work groups
Selected Target Areas
 Training in logic models
 QI methods, which they will apply to identify appropriate
measures for a few statewide health indicators.

QI Projects

8 Projects-focused on program work


Development of Logic Models, use of data, communicable
disease
2 Projects focused on building QI infrastructure
Spokane
 Mason County


3 Collaborations around focused topics
Immunizations-2 counties
 Chlamydia-2 counties
 Birth Certificates-Hospital and DOH

Lessons Learned
Money definitely matters
 Monthly follow-up sustains projects
 Collaboration improves outcomes
 Content experts make a difference
 Quality improvement isn’t always the
“right” strategy-Ex: Birth Certificate
Project

MLC 3-Some Repetition and integration into
agency structures

Nine Projects –selected through RFP Process
 Overlap with legislative mandate
 Investigation of notifiable conditions
 Improvement of immunization rates
 Reduce obesity and risk for chronic disease
 Health
problems identified through data
 Additional

funding received for prenatal care
Funding- Each project receives $12,000 a year for
2.5 years
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

Senior leadership involvement and support

Community partnerships

Team effort



Participation in web conferences with peer project
teams and Learning Congresses
Review and understand data
Community involvement and partnerships
OVERALL PROGRESS TO DATE


AIM statements
Web conference sessions every six weeks with
consultants

Work plans

State participation on each team

Learning Congress - August 2009

For three of the projects-part of larger agency-wide
QI efforts
MLC3 Lessons Learned - Projects









Teams of 4-7 people kept everyone motivated
Prizes can make a difference
Aim statements are difficult to write and take time
Start with a small idea for improvement
Know the population you are targeting for improvement
Need better access to best practices
Staff like the opportunity to work on special projects
Projects put on “back burner” with H1N1
Staffing changes significantly affect the project success
MLC3 Lessons Learned - Consultation





Emphasize and teach the Breakthrough Method for
Collaboratives so everyone will understand the process
Plan for support if a crisis arises, such as H1N1 or the
economic downturn
Consider alternating content expertise with QI expertise
Ensure that the Collaborative has sufficient support from
state-level or other (PHI) staff
Plan for several Learning Sessions for the Collaborative
WHAT WORKS IN WASHINGTON




Provide training on Quality Improvement
Provide funding-even if small
Create Quality Councils and infrastructure
Use the collaborative method and provide regular
training



Create projects with similar aims
Connect to other initiatives and work
Involve Leadership
THANK YOU
RWJ and NNPHI
for the support to make a difference