3.1 case studies (t)
-
Upload
ubcchcm -
Category
Health & Medicine
-
view
272 -
download
2
description
Transcript of 3.1 case studies (t)
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 1
Case studies in priority setting
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 2
Case study I
LHINs in Ontario
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 3
Local Health Integration Networks
•14 LHINs established in 2006 in Ontario
•Commissioners of health care each with own Board of Directors
•Provider organizations continue to function but are now accountable to LHINs
•13 of 14 LHINs signed on to the priority setting project
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 4
LHIN Priority Setting Project• LHINs need a strategic, evidence-informed, fair decision-
making framework to guide priority setting in practice:
• Aligns resources strategically with system goals and community needs
• Leads to publicly defensible decisions based on available evidence and community values
• Facilitates stakeholder engagement around use of finite resources
• Supports public accountability of decision-makers
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 5
Guiding principles
•Economic principles of ‘value for money’
• What priorities should be set to optimize health benefits & achieve health system goals given resource constraints?
•Ethical principles of fair process
• How should these priorities be set to ensure legitimacy and fairness in the eyes of affected stakeholders?
•Strategic alignment with LHIN role in Ontario
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 6
Priority Setting Framework
234
1
5 54321
1 35 21
234
1
5 54321
1 35 21
1. Determine aim & scopeof decision making.
4. Develop decision criteriawith stakeholder input.
3. Clarify existing resource mix.
5. Identify & rank funding options.
7. Provide formal decision review process.
8. Evaluate & improve.
6. Communicate decisionsand rationale. 2. Identify priority setting
committee.
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 7
Assessment criteria (MCDA)• Assessment criteria link LHIN decisions explicitly and
systematically to local and health system strategic directions, values, and performance goals.
• Assessment criteria are used to:
• Assess & rank funding options
• Explain LHIN decisions to stakeholders
• Ensure a consistent rationale for LHIN decisions
• Four criteria domains were proposed based on the literature and relevant MoHLTC & LHIN documents
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 8
Decision criteria domains
STRATEGIC FITAlignment with: IHSP (Integrated Health Service Plan); provider system role (mandate and capacity)
POPULATION HEALTHContribution toward improvements in: Health status, prevalence, health promotion/ prevention
SYSTEM VALUESContribution toward fulfilling: Client-focus, partnerships, community engagement, innovation, equity, operational efficiency
SYSTEM PERFORMANCEContribution toward improvements in: access, quality, sustainability, integration
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 9
Proposal assessment planStep 1. Compliance Screen
Legal/regulatory Contractual Agreements (e.g., AAs)
Step 2. Evaluation (15 criteria) Strategic Fit (2) Population Health (3) System Values (6) System Performance (4)
Step 3. Cost-Benefit Analysis
Step 4. System Readiness Screen LHIN capacity Interdependency Risk Health system impact
234
1
5 54321
1 35 21
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 10
LHIN Pilots•Pilots launched in February 2008
•Year 2 of LHIN funding ; Some previous experience to build from
•Ministry direction issued in May 2008
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 11
LHIN Pilots
• North West – Urgent Priorities Fund
• Champlain – Urgent Priorities Fund
• Central West – Aging at Home
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 12
Urgent Priority Funding ’08/09
Idea sheets Business cases
Funded proposals
Success rate
91 19 6 7%
• Funds available: ~$800K
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 13
Process overview• Goal was to advance IHSP priorities by targeting ALC/ ER
issues in 4 communities
• Criteria: 15 explicitly linked to ALC-ER with relevant metrics
• Developed by LHIN, reviewed & validated by 23 stakeholders, and approved by Board
• Process:
• Information Session with Health Service Providers to outline criteria & process
• Evaluation Committee = 5 LHIN staff + 4 community members
• EC screened Idea Sheets, identified those for business case development, and evaluated business cases using 4-step tool
• Applicants notified by letter
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 14
Process Evaluation
• On-line Survey of HSPs (n = 110)
• LHIN Interviews (n = 26)
• Analysis
• Local & aggregate analysis
• Stratified analysis (e.g., sector, outcome)
• Interdisciplinary analysis using A4R
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 15
Key lessons•Ministry mingling can be a reality
•Advisory role of process
•Communication and the impact on HSP engagement
• Importance of leveling the playing field for submission development
•Allocating new money versus re-allocating existing money and process buy-in
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 16
Case Study II
Menno Place
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 17
Plan
•What is Menno Place?
•Why PBMA at Menno Place?
•PBMA implementation and results
•The second year
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 18
Menno Place•Menno Home and Menno Hospital
•Residential complex care
•Menno Home: 196 beds, annual budget about $11.7 million (2007-2008)
•Menno Hospital:151 beds, annual budget about $12.5 million
•Daily operations managed by the Management Team
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 19
Why PBMA?•Structural cost problem- Spring 2007
•Menno Home projected deficit for 08-09 was $355,000
•Menno Hospital projected deficit for 08-09 was $191,000
•Total projected accumulated deficit at the end of 08-09 almost $1 million
•Need for a “structural” solution
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 20
Implementation- Scope
•Across both the Home and Hospital
•Reallocations from one to the other are possible
•No pre-set split of cost reduction between the facilities
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 21
Implementation- Advisory Panel
•25 members
•Union and association are represented
•Wide but shallow representation
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 22
Implementation- Mission statement
To meet the long-term housing and health needs of our frail and elderly residents by providing quality care and support in a compassionate, Christian environment.
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 23
Implementation- CriteriaDeveloped by Management Team, approved by Advisory
panel
Four categories:
• Strategic alignment
• Technical efficiency
• Quality of services
• Management effectiveness
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 24
Criteria- Weights and scoring tool
• Developed by Management Team and approved by Advisory panel
• Scoring tool went from -3 to +3
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 25
Proposal development
• Staff involvement- with incentives
• Two step process: short form and business case (long form)
• Requirements : resource releases= 5%
• No explicit limitations on investment proposals
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 26
Proposal requirementsSeven departments:
• Resident Care Services
• Administration
• People Services
• Food Services
• Laundry
• Housekeeping
• Maintenance
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 27
Short form proposals• 111 proposals- 540 staff
• 93 resource releases
• 18 investments
• 80 related to the Home
• 20 related to the Hospital
• 11 related to both
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 28
Short form assessment
• All proposals were reviewed within one week of submission
• Feedback on all proposals
• Proposals were either:
- Declined
- Returned for rework
- Eligible for inclusion in the pool from which the proposals for business case would be selected.
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 29
Business case proposals
• 12 resource release and 1 resource investment proposals moved to business case
• How did we get there:
- Amalgamation of proposals by theme
- Limit on the total number of business case proposals
- Assessment on the basis of strategic feasibility from the perspective of the Management Team
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 30
Rating meeting
Investment proposal rating: 94.42
Worst resource release proposal rating: -40.84
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 31
Funding recommendations• All proposals accepted for implementation
• Forecasted results: reduction in total costs of about $409,000 for 08/09
• Split between Home and Hospital:
Home $390,000
Hospital $19,000
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 32
Recommendations implementation
•Proposed by Management Team and approved by Board
•Support of union and association
• Interim budget impact as of October 23, 2008: on track for a cost reduction of $399,000
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 33
The next yearBackground:
•Four year debt elimination plan from the Board with Home and Hospital specific targets
•Stakeholder pressure: “equitable” distribution of adjustments
•New Advisory Panel- about one third new members
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 34
Some problems• Key symptom of problems: lack of proposals
• Challenges to proposals development:
- lack of enthusiasm for the process
- lack of ideas
- notions of fairness
- no proposal means no PBMA reallocation…
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 35
The next year- Back on track
3 points were made with Advisory Panel:
•PBMA does not determine available resources but works within available resources
•Within available resources, PBMA gives participants a voice
•Proposals are the responsibility of Advisory Panel
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 36
Lessons from experience/success factors
•Shared vision
•Credible commitment
•Resources for process (training, ongoing support, time freed up)
• Incentives to encourage participation
•Learning/ quality improvement: changes to Advisory Panel composition, to templates, to criteria
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 37
Case study III
Vancouver Coastal Health- Community Services
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 38
Community Services•Community services division
• Services cover a continuum of care – from health promotion and prevention to primary care, secondary care, rehab and palliative
• Total budget for 09/10: just over $600 million
• Faced large budget deficit not resolved with ‘usual means’
•Aim to address the deficit and consider potential for re-allocation
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 39
Scope and timeline
• Specific programs were targeted by the process (about $250 million of the total program budget)
• Programs were excluded for valid reasons: mandated programs, joint programs…
• Budget challenge: $4.65 million
• Training began Jan. 6, recommendations approved March 23
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 40
Process structure
•Senior Executive Team
•Advisory Panel
•Working Group - included clinical leaders
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 41
Proposals
Two phases proposal development process:
1) Disinvestments
2) Investments
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 42
Disinvestment proposals
•55 proposals with a value of approximately $5.4 million
• Included efficiency gains and service changes (efficiency gains about $650,000)
• In the end, 44 options recommended with a total value of $4.9M
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 43
Disinvestment examples
•Reduce admin support to XX area
•Deletion of 0.8 FTE community developer for XX program
•Eliminate weekend youth clinic at XX centre
•Close Health Contact Centre
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 44
Investment proposals
•11 proposals with a total value of $1.9 million
•Put forward 6 investment options of about $0.5M but working group recommended not evaluating against disinvestment options until budget gap cleared
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 45
Project evaluation
• Successful in outlining a plan to meet financial obligations
• All participants said decisions were stronger/ more defensible then with no process
• Strong support for process from CFO and well received by senior executive and Board
Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 46
Moving forward• Decide on alternative to historical/ political allocation
and across the board cuts
• Training on principles and process, establish working group, develop criteria and templates
• Investment and/ or disinvestment proposals submitted and assessed
• Recommendations for changes to resource allocation
• Changes implementation and process refinement