dashboard review mid year fy 2015
play

Dashboard Review Mid-year FY 2015 Joe Selby, MD, MPH Executive - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dashboard Review Mid-year FY 2015 Joe Selby, MD, MPH Executive Director Michele Orza, ScD Senior Advisor to the Executive Director Presentation Overview Q2 FY 2015 Dashboard Noteworthy Items Yellow-flagged Items However beautiful


  1. Dashboard Review Mid-year FY 2015 Joe Selby, MD, MPH Executive Director Michele Orza, ScD Senior Advisor to the Executive Director

  2. Presentation Overview • Q2 FY 2015 Dashboard • Noteworthy Items • Yellow-flagged Items However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Winston Churchill

  3. Discussion Questions • Do you see the need for further action in response to any of the indicators discussed today? • What further improvements should we consider so that our Dashboard and accompanying materials effectively convey the status of our work and progress toward our goals ?

  4. Legend *Influencing Research* On Target Q3=Q3 2014 The University of Pittsburgh credits PCORI with being the inspiration for and central to the Board of Governors Off Target NA Q4=Q4 2014 establishment of their Comparative Effectiveness Research Core FY2015 Dashboard – Q2 Needs Attention Q1=Q1 2015 Our Goals: Increase Information, Speed Implementation, and Influence Research (As of 3/31/2015) Q2=Q2 2015 NA=Not Applicable Funds Committed to Research – Budget=$640M Projects Awarded Percent of Projects Meeting All Milestones Targeted Pragmatic Broad Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 100 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PCORnet Engagement 90 30 Percent Meeting All Number of Projects 80 Budget 70 60 20 50 40 Actual 30 10 20 10 NA 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 0 Recruitment Engagement PPRNs CDRNs $ Millions Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Completion of Projects Journal Articles Published Uptake of Methodology Standards 30 Q3 5,000 30 35 Q3 Expected Q4 30 Actual Q4 4,000 25 Number of Projects Q1 20 25 Number of Articles Q1 20 Q2 3,000 20 Q2 15 15 2,000 10 10 10 1,000 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Web Views Citations By Awardees About or By PCORI Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Expenditures – Total Budget=$362M Progress of PCORnet – Completion of Phase I Q1 Q2 (5 mos) Q3 Q4 Obesity Research Phase II Governance Cohort Budget PFA policies Project Phase II Research Released approved Awarded awarded Actual Other Q1 Q2 Budget Other Version 2.0 Aspirin Health =Target Q1 Q2 Q3 Actual of CDM Trial Systems =Actual Complete Awarded Projects 0 50 100 150 200 250 Awarded $ Millions

  5. Legend *Influencing Research* On Target Q3=Q3 2014 The University of Pittsburgh credits PCORI with being the inspiration for and central to the Board of Governors Off Target NA Q4=Q4 2014 establishment of their Comparative Effectiveness Research Core FY2015 Dashboard – Q2 Needs Attention Q1=Q1 2015 Our Goals: Increase Information, Speed Implementation, and Influence Research (As of 3/31/2015) Q2=Q2 2015 NA=Not Applicable Funds Committed to Research – Budget=$640M Projects Awarded Percent of Projects Meeting All Milestones Targeted Pragmatic Broad Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 100 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PCORnet Engagement 90 30 Percent Meeting All Number of Projects 80 Budget 70 60 20 50 40 Actual 30 10 20 10 NA 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 0 Recruitment Engagement PPRNs CDRNs $ Millions Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Completion of Projects Journal Articles Published Uptake of Methodology Standards 30 Q3 5,000 30 35 Q3 Expected Q4 30 Actual Q4 4,000 25 Number of Projects Q1 20 25 Number of Articles Q1 20 Q2 3,000 20 Q2 15 15 2,000 10 10 10 1,000 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Web Views Citations By Awardees About or By PCORI Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Expenditures – Total Budget=$362M Progress of PCORnet – Completion of Phase I Q1 Q2 (5 mos) Q3 Q4 Obesity Research Phase II Governance Cohort Budget PFA policies Project Phase II Research Released approved Awarded awarded Actual Other Q1 Q2 Budget Other Version 2.0 Aspirin Health =Target Q1 Q2 Q3 Actual of CDM Trial Systems =Actual Complete Awarded Projects 0 50 100 150 200 250 Awarded $ Millions

  6. Legend *Influencing Research* On Target Q3=Q3 2014 The University of Pittsburgh credits PCORI with being the inspiration for and central to the Board of Governors Off Target NA Q4=Q4 2014 establishment of their Comparative Effectiveness Research Core FY2015 Dashboard – Q2 Needs Attention Q1=Q1 2015 Our Goals: Increase Information, Speed Implementation, and Influence Research (As of 3/31/2015) Q2=Q2 2015 NA=Not Applicable Funds Committed to Research – Budget=$640M Projects Awarded Percent of Projects Meeting All Milestones Targeted Pragmatic Broad Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 100 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PCORnet Engagement 90 30 Percent Meeting All Number of Projects 80 Budget 70 60 20 50 40 Actual 30 10 20 10 NA 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 0 Recruitment Engagement PPRNs CDRNs $ Millions Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Completion of Projects Journal Articles Published Uptake of Methodology Standards 30 Q3 5,000 30 35 Q3 Expected Q4 30 Actual Q4 4,000 25 Number of Projects Q1 20 25 Number of Articles Q1 20 Q2 3,000 20 Q2 15 15 2,000 10 10 10 1,000 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Web Views Citations By Awardees About or By PCORI Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Expenditures – Total Budget=$362M Progress of PCORnet – Completion of Phase I Q1 Q2 (5 mos) Q3 Q4 Obesity Research Phase II Governance Cohort Budget PFA policies Project Phase II Research Released approved Awarded awarded Actual Other Q1 Q2 Budget Other Version 2.0 Aspirin Health =Target Q1 Q2 Q3 Actual of CDM Trial Systems =Actual Complete Awarded Projects 0 50 100 150 200 250 Awarded $ Millions

  7. *Influencing Research* Early Signs of The University of Pittsburgh credits PCORI with being an inspiration for and central to the establishment of their Comparative Effectiveness Research Center Influence on Research The Comparative Effectiveness Research Center (CERC) at the University Of Pittsburgh and UPMC • Established in 2011 to support Patient-Centered CER at the University of Pittsburgh and UPMC • Interest in developing this infrastructure stemmed from • desire to promote collaborative PC-CER across the University and UPMC • availability of new funding sources, such as PCORI • CERC aims to: • Support high-quality PC-CER across the University through infrastructure support, training, collaborations, and strategic coordination of responses to funding opportunities • Promote the University’s PC -CER externally to increase funding opportunities • Develop new statistical and methodological approaches to advance the science of PC-CER • Expand the pool of researchers trained in PC-CER via interactive workshops, seminars, and meetings • Demonstrate the translation of PC-CER via dissemination and implementation into actions that effectively reach the patients and directly impact clinical care “PCORI is central to the CERC and has greatly influenced work across the University” Sally Morton, Director of CERC and PCORI Methodology Committee Member

  8. *Influencing Research* Early Signs of The University of Pittsburgh credits PCORI with being an inspiration for and central to the establishment of their Comparative Effectiveness Research Center Influence on Research At the University of Pittsburgh, PCORI is credited with motivating their: • Establishment of a HIPAA compliant data center: • 20 projects currently using it • $13 million across all projects (PCORI and other funders) • Development of training and educational opportunities: • Graduate courses and training grants (AHRQ-funded) based on the PCORI Methodology Standards • 54 training workshops since 2011 on PC-CER funding opportunities and review criteria, PC- CER methodology, and stakeholder engagement • Mock reviews for PCORI applications (assess engagement, adherence to standards) • Emphasis on stakeholder engagement: • Influence apparent in existing projects • “These are new concepts for some of our researchers – PCORI is making them think about the stakeholders and how they can qualify to be a PCORI project ” – Monica Costlow, CERC Project Director • Encouragement of people at the University and UPMC to apply to be PCORI reviewers and to get involved in other PCORI activities

  9. Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 100 90 Progress of Research Projects: Percent Meeting All 80 70 60 50 40 30 Additional Measures 20 10 NA 0 Recruitment Engagement PPRNs CDRNs 100 64 76 90 47 2014 2015 55 80 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 70 47 60 18 Percent Number at top of column 140 50 is the number of projects 186 66 included that quarter 196 40 (the denominator) 222 30 20 304 10 245 245 287 245 287 245 304 0 0 0 0 NA 0 Meeting All Meeting Obtained IRB Payment Hold for Contract Terminated Milestones Recruitment Approval on Programmatic Modification for Milestones Schedule Reasons Milestones

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend