Transcript Topic and Strategic Planning Presentation

The Bree Collaborative:
One Year Later
Update & Future Planning
Discussion
Bree Collaborative Meeting
October 1, 2012
Purpose of Presentation
 Review “A Year in Review”
 Review the current landscape
 Start to discuss Bree Collaborative
members’ expectations/outcomes for
Year 2 (fall 2012-2013)
2
Outcome of Presentation
 Gain a shared understanding of the path
Bree Collaborative has traveled and basic
agreement on the path ahead (next few
months)
 Spur Bree Collaborative members to start
thinking about goals and expected outcomes
for Year 2
3
First Bree Collaborative meeting
held on 9/30/11…366 days ago
Expected outcome/goal set by Governor
Gregoire: By July 2012 develop at least one
impactful state-wide solution to a significant
health care problem in our state.
4
Accomplishments – many!
 24 clinical and quality experts agreed to come and work
together to decrease variation and improve quality in WA
State
 Exceeded legislative mandate - Selected 4 topics
 Achieved expected outcome/goal - Completion of OB report
& COAP transparency agreement
 Movement towards transparency of inappropriate PCI
cardiac procedures
 Work underway to improve Potentially Avoidable
Readmissions
 Agreement to start work on acute low back pain and
readmission payment reform
5
The Evolution of the
Bree Collaborative
 Bree legislation provided a foundation - a “roadmap”
 Bree voted on topics/priorities last September 2011 to
position Bree to have many wins (see handout in
packet)
Along with its achievements the Bree Collaborative has
grown, and is no longer a new organization…
 Policies and procedures (bylaws) needed
 Work and strategic plans needed so work matches
resources and priorities
…while acknowledging huge uncertainties with CMMI
grant and change in Governor leadership
6
Bree Collaborative: Next 7 Months
Oct
2012
Nov
2012
Dec
2012
Jan
2013
Feb
2013
OB Implementation
PAR Readmissions
workgroup
Readmissions Payment
Reform Subgroup
Spine/low Back Pain
Workgroup
Cardiology (PCI measure
publically reported)
Red denotes high resource intensity; Orange denotes medium resource intensity;
Yellow denotes low resource intensity (monitoring)
Mar
2013
Apr
2013
New Topic Selection/Development
 Solicited Bree Collaborative members’ input on new topics
via email 9/4/12
 Sent Bree member survey results from Sept 2011
 Low response rate
 Some Bree members question taking on new topics now
 Right now Recap
 4 active topics (including OB implementation activities)
 3 active or soon-to-be active subgroups
 Resources (1 FTE) at maximum capacity
Idea : Hold off new topic selection discussion
until November 30th or January meeting
8
What’s next?
What’s our vision for Bree?
 What are Bree Collaborative members’ expectations?
 Y2 Goal ideas for the Bree Collaborative?
 Strawman goal: By July 2013 develop at least two
impactful state-wide solutions to significant health care
problems in our state.
Continue this discussion and vote on goal/expected
outcomes for YR 2 at November or January Bree
meetings
9
Preparation for New Topic Selection & Strategic
Planning Discussion in November or January
 What type of information do Collaborative members need in
advance?
 Hire a facilitator?
 Topic Selection Discussion
 Use last year survey results as starting point?
 Select or prioritize a mix of topics that address all or one QI
strategies – transparency, public reporting, payment reform?
 Leverage existing efforts – COAP? Choosing Wisely?
 What guidance or criteria is needed beyond current topic selection
criteria (next slide)?
 Other Ideas for Strategic Planning Discussion?
10
Current Topic Selection Criteria
(from Bree legislation)
 Substantial variation in practice patterns
 High utilization and/or cost growth trends in Washington
State without better outcomes
 A source of waste and inefficiency in care delivery
 Patient Safety issues
In addition, consider the following questions about the topic:
 What data are available to support that there is waste,
variation, high utilization, excess costs?
 Are the waste and quality aspects of this topic avoidable?
 Are there proven means/strategies to address this topic?
11