1 / 29

Health Information Technology Request for Grant Applications

Health Information Technology Request for Grant Applications. Applicants Conference November 21, 2006 10:00am - 1:00pm. Conference Panelists. Bill Schroth - Moderator Anna Colello - Evaluation Co-Chair Ellen Flink - Evaluation Co-Chair Marybeth Hefner-DOH - GrantsAdministrator

Lucy
Download Presentation

Health Information Technology Request for Grant Applications

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. Health Information TechnologyRequest for Grant Applications Applicants Conference November 21, 2006 10:00am - 1:00pm

  2. Conference Panelists • Bill Schroth - Moderator • Anna Colello - Evaluation Co-Chair • Ellen Flink - Evaluation Co-Chair • Marybeth Hefner-DOH - GrantsAdministrator • Janice Dee – DOH – HEAL NY • Bob Veino - DOH - Legal • Tracy Raleigh - DASNY - Finance • Sara Richards - DASNY - Legal

  3. HEAL NY - Phase III • Support Federal Strategic HIT Plan • Broad definition of Clinical Data Information Sharing Projects • Principle: Large public interest in building clinical data sharing infrastructure • Majority of funds to existing stakeholders • Show community benefit and support

  4. Financial Issues • Funding for capital costs - Statutory • 60% match funds required • Leverage grants • “Skin in the game” • Reduce to 50% in certain circumstances • Financial viability • Real implementation, not temporary • Encourage payer involvement

  5. Multi-stakeholders/Community Buy-in • Across corporate/stakeholder boundaries • Minimum requirements • The more the merrier • Openness to new stakeholders • CAUTION: Make sure applicant is • “eligible”

  6. Technology • Interoperability • Existing standards, certification for EHRs • Choice of platforms/vendors • Prescriptive standards for e-Imaging and eRx • Requirements • Recommendations

  7. Three Project Categories • e-Imaging $10MM • Public Health $10MM • Clinical data sharing $32.875+ Million • Increase proportionally if total Phase 3 amount increased

  8. 1-e-Imaging: Interoperable Sharing of Imaging Data across a Community • Imaging is the fastest growing medical expense • Digital imaging increases diagnostic capability: resolution, • contrast, historical images • Opportunity to avoid duplication & unnecessary images • Advanced technical standards • Four (4) Requirements • Decision/Recommendations • Financial support from payers, possibly vendors • Required: 20% funding from Payers • Higher scores for larger payer and/or vendor financing • Only 50% match required for projects utilizing existing • PACS

  9. 2 – Public Health • Projects with specific public health functionality: • Clinical laboratory data • Medical records • Connect with the clinical • Detailed specifications and standards

  10. 3 – Clinical Data Sharing – Provider infrastructure & connecting software for various projects • E H R, eRX, and other • Connect others to existing projects • Connect Existing projects • Projects in Geographic Areas where none exist • E H R Certification • eRX standards • 3 Requirements • Recommendations/Discussion

  11. Regional Allocations • Evaluation combines project quality and category with geographic distribution • Right to alter grant/project size – hope not to use • Three steps: • Fill e-Imaging & public health categories • Geographic distribution to specific 6 regions • Remainder to highest scores statewide

  12. Example: Step One - e-Imaging & Public Health 20 18 MI L L I ONS 16 14 12 10 8 $5MM $5MM $5MM $4MM 6 $2MM 4 $0 2 0 Western Central Hudson Valley LI Northern NY

  13. Example: Step Two – Geographic Quotas Example: Step Two – Geographic Quotas 20 20 $11MM $11MM 18 18 MILLIONS MILLIONS 16 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 $5MM $5MM $5MM $5MM $4MM $4MM 6 6 $3.1MM $3.1MM $2MM $2MM 4 4 2 2 0 0 Western Western Central Central HudsonValley HudsonValley LI LI Northern Northern NY NY e-Imaging & PH e-Imaging & PH Geographic Quotas Geographic Quotas

  14. Example: Step Three – Highest Remaining Scores $20MM $20 $16 $9MM $12 $8MM $7MM $5MM $4MM $8 $4 $0 Hudson Valley LI Western Central Northern NYC e-Imaging & PH Geographic Highest Remaining Scores MI L L I ONS

  15. Capital Costs and Matching Funds • Project Phases • Preliminary design phase • Software development phase • Post-implementation/operational phase

  16. Preliminary Design Phase • Costs apply only to matching costs • Direct costs only • Must be incurred 10/1/06 or later

  17. Software Development Phase • Costs can apply to match or be reimbursable • Direct costs only • If used for match, must be incurred 10/1/06 or later • If used for reimbursement, must be incurred after contract start

  18. Post-Implementation/Operational Phase • Costs apply only to matching costs • Direct costs only • Must be incurred after contract start date

  19. Examples of Allowed Costs • Payroll for staff directly involved • Payroll related costs (employee benefits) • Travel for direct staff • Hardware • Software purchase - specific to project • Software development by third party

  20. Eligible Applicants • Legally existing corporation licensed to operate entity Section 3.2 in NYS of RGA May be an eligible applicant for only one application, but may be a stakeholder in one or more applications • • May be Clinical Information Data Exchange made up of Section 3.2 entities and must exchange data with stakeholder of a different category

  21. Stakeholders • Same entities as eligible applicants with the addition of adult homes with assisted living programs, hospices, payers, pharmacies and labs • Must be medical entity to qualify and the more appropriate organizations that partner the better • May be part of multiple applications

  22. Requirement to Certify that: • I will make every effort to ensure that the applicant will be consistent with the goals and recommendations, when available, of the Commission on Health Care Facilities in the Twenty-First Century, as established pursuant to Section 31 of Part E of Chapter 63 of the Laws of 2005. • I will make every effort to ensure that the applicant will design a project which is interoperable and adheres to the national standards for their type of Project. • I certify that the work covered by the Grant Disbursement Agreements (“GDAs”) shall be deemed “public work” subject to and in accordance with Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Labor Law, if applicable. • I certify that the applicant will collaborate with other grant recipients in their region and with the Department of Health on the development of statewide standards. • I certify that the information contained in this application and attached materials are accurate and true. • I certify that the funds received pursuant to subdivision 1 of section 2818 of the Public Health Law will be expended solely for the purposes for which the monies were awarded under the RGA for __________________________________. • Attachment 6 (Name of Facility)

  23. Evaluation Criteria • The Technical component is worth 70% and the Financial component is worth 30% • Minimum score of 65 to be eligible for consideration • Within the technical component, the areas of most importance are: quality, technology and community buy-in/commitment • The technical component and financial component will be reviewed by separate teams • An awards committee will make the final award determinations

  24. Evaluation Criteria • Project Description - 40 points • Technology - 20 points • Project Evaluation / Monitoring - 10 points - Financial 30 points • • Cost effectiveness • Financial viability

  25. ReviewTeams • Program Teams • Technology Teams • Financial Teams

  26. Award CriteriaConsiderations • Strength and scope of overall Project • Availability of funds • Responsiveness to the goals and objectives of HEAL NY and RGA • Evidence of substantial applicant organizational capability, support, and commitment • Financial commitment and viability

  27. Submitting the Application • Applications must be prepared using the forms on the website, including the budget and certification. Attachments can be found at: http://www.nyhealth.gov. /funding/rfa/0610100951/index.htm • Applications should be submitted to: Robert Schmidt Director, HEAL NY Implementation Team New York State Department of Health Hedley Building, 6th floor Troy, NY 12180

  28. Key Dates • Questions due by November 27, 2006 • Questions & Answers will be posted • December 1, 2006 at http://www.nyhealth.gov/funding/rfa/0610100951/index.htm • Application due date - January 8, 2007 • Anticipated Award Date - Spring 2007

More Related