1 / 15

National Evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Early Observations

National Evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Early Observations. AHRQ 2012 Annual Conference Moving Ahead: Leveraging Knowledge and Action to Improve Health Care Quality Tuesday, September 11, 2012. The National Evaluation Team.

shen
Download Presentation

National Evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Early Observations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. National Evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Early Observations AHRQ 2012 Annual Conference Moving Ahead: Leveraging Knowledge and Action to Improve Health Care Quality Tuesday, September 11, 2012

  2. The National Evaluation Team • Mathematica: H. Ireys, L. Foster, C. McLaughlin, A. Christensen, G. Ferry, B. Natzke, others • Urban: K. Devers, J. Kenney, I. Hill, R. Burton, S. McMorrow, others • AcademyHealth: L. Simpson, V. Thomas • AHRQ: C. Brach, S. Farr • CMS: K. Llanos, E. Hill

  3. Today’s Presentation • Overview of the CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Grant Program • Goals and methods of the national evaluation • Early observations about practice-level reporting of quality measures

  4. The CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Program • Congressionally mandated • $100 million dollar program • Large federally-funded efforts specifically focused on improving quality of child health care • Five-year grants awarded by CMS to 10 grantees, involving 18 states, Feb. 2010 • National evaluation overseen by AHRQ, Aug. 2010 – Sept. 2015

  5. CHIPRA Quality Demonstration Program (cont’d) • Focus on five strategies to improve quality • Show how quality measures can be used to improve quality of care for children (Category A) • Demonstrate utility of HIT/EHR applications (Category B) • Implement provider-based models (Category C) • Apply model format for EHRs for children (Category D) • Other innovative approaches to improve quality (Category E)

  6. Demonstration Grantees* and States, by Grant Category

  7. Example of Within Category Variation: States’ Activities Related to Quality Measures • Expand, build on existing data and reporting infrastructure, such as warehouses, linked datasets • Apply measures at practice, system, and state levels • Develop new measures, beyond core measure set • Report performance to various audiences: providers, health plans, families/public, policymakers • Link performance on measures to incentives 7

  8. National Evaluation: Goals • Goals • Identify effective strategies to improve quality of children’s health and health care • Disseminate information about what works, why it works, and what’s worth replicating • “Tell the stories” of projects, categories, states, grantees

  9. National Evaluation: Methods • Mixed-Methods Design • Quantitative (claims/administrative files) & qualitative (site visits, document review) • Descriptive/compare-and-contrast analysis of program implementation • Comparative analysis of trends/outcomes • Impact analyses for selected medical home projects • Multiple levels of analyses: patient, provider, practice, network, regional, state, grantee, groups of grantees

  10. Early Observations About Practice-Level Reporting • Used information from 4 states: Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania • Site visits conducted: March – August 2012 • Results to be published in October issue brief

  11. What are States Learning AboutPractice-Level Reporting? • Practice-level reporting: Verydifferent from state-level reporting • Technical challenges re: accessing data sources from multiple systems, defining quality measure denominators • Data collection via providers: Managing burden, expectations • Two questions particularly important to practices • Can my practice influence these measures? • Are these measures useful for our QI efforts?

  12. Practice-level Reporting: Take Away Messages • An essential step: Involving physician practices in selecting measures for quality-improvement projects • Adapting measures originally designed for state-level: An unexpectedly resource-intensive task • States are actively turning to EHRs and HIEs • Barriers: Outdated, undeveloped, or unsophisticated health IT, data infrastructures

  13. National Evaluation Web Page

  14. Web Page • http://www.ahrq.gov/chipra/demoeval/ • Features • Clickable map of the demonstration states • State-at-a-Glance descriptions • Category descriptions • More about the national evaluation • Reports & Resources: Findings, issue briefs

  15. Contact Information For more information or to share your good ideas, contact: Henry T. Ireys, PhD Senior Fellow, Mathematica Policy Research 202-554-7536 hireys@mathematica-mpr.com

More Related