Beaver County System of Care Steering Committee: Member Survey HPW Associates, LLC April 23, 2013
Committee Member Affiliation Primary Identification/Affiliation (N=43) Consumer/ Family Members, 4.8% (2) Project Recovery Adminstrators & Consultants, 16.7% (8) Regional Managed Care Beaver County Provider, 4.8% Providers, (2) 73.8% (31)
Survey Results Response Rate: 71% or 29 members of the Steering Committee responded to the survey.* Submitted by (N=29): 28% (8) 45% (13) Program Manager Agency Administrator Consumer/Family Member 3% (1) Other Specialized Positions 24% (7) * Survey administrators were excluded from this calculation and did not participate in the survey.
Purpose of the Survey Obtain information related to participation on the Steering Committee Provide recommendations for improvement
Primary Reasons for Participating 80% 59% (17) 60% 45% (13) 38% (11) 40% 28% (8) 17% 17% 20% (5) (5) 0% Networking with Agency Designee Gathering Networking with Change Agent Other other Providers Information Change Agents Duplicated Responses (N=29) Other Includes: Worthwhile project, reporting on other initiatives, or improve the System of Care.
Expectations 76% 76% 80% (22) (22) 60% 48% 45% (14) (13) 34% 40% (10) 28% (8) 20% 10% (3) 0% Relationships with Advocate for Receive Input from Relationships with Information on the Advocate for Peers Other Providers Changes in the Minkoff & Cline Consumers/Family CCISC Principles System of Care Members Duplicated Responses (N=29) Other: Information on unified System of Care and ensure peers are treated with respect and included.
What have you gained? Word Cloud of Responses* *The larger the word, the more often it was mentioned by a respondent.
What have you gained? (cont’d) Partner and collaborate with other providers in Beaver County Growth in relationships Improved understanding County-wide (and more) initiatives Improved knowledge of the System of Care A more welcoming environment for consumers Ability to effect change in the System of Care Networking
Number of Meetings Attended 35% 31% (9) 28% 30% (8) 25% 21% (6) 20% 15% 10% (3) 10% 7% (2) 3% 5% (1) 0% None One Two Three All No Answer N=29
Reasons for NOT Attending 50% 45% (13) Non-issues: • Location 40% • Meeting day • Transportation • Not interested 30% 17% 20% (5) 14% (4) 10% 10% 10% 10% (3) (3) (3) (3) 10% 3% (1) 0% Agency constraints Scheduling conflict Other agency staff Did not know Meeting time Insufficient notice Not cost effective Other* attended about the meetings of the meetings Duplicated Results (N=29) *Other Includes: Meetings are too long, emergency situation took priority, and member does not believe in the value of the committee.
Could Not Attend… Send a representative? Participate via conference call? 25 10 9 20 8 20 8 6 15 10 4 2 5 3 0 0 Yes No Yes No N=17 N=23
Suggestions to Improve Meeting Post the minutes of the meeting on the System of Care website Schedule meetings for the year and publicize in advance Alternate meeting times to enable more members to attend Topics Delineate “clear steps” in achieving “better coordination of care” Improve management of dual diagnosis clients Use of data to monitor progress being made Involve and sustain more peer involvement in the System of Care Planning Use the committee to plan more initiatives in Beaver County
Thank you for your continued participation on the Beaver County System of Care Steering Committee.
Recommend
More recommend
