320 likes | 518 Views
Project Outcomes. Aging network move toward a coordinated, systematic and consistent planning process OAA State/AAA compliance plans reflective of comprehensive planning efforts of SUAs
E N D
1. STATE PLANNING GRANTS
2. Project Outcomes Aging network move toward a coordinated, systematic and consistent planning process
OAA State/AAA compliance plans reflective of comprehensive planning efforts of SUAs & AAAs
Purpose to demonstrate clear and purposeful methods of comprehensive State and area planning methodologies
3. Comprehensive Plans Include All programs & funding streams administered by the SUA and AAAs
Programs & services for older individuals administered by other state government agencies
4. Comprehensive Plans Include 2 AoA Strategic Action Plan goals
AoA Initiatives
ADRCs
POMP
Evidence-Based Prevention Programs
Integration of long-term care services/planning within the State
Incorporation of internet technology (IT) systems management into planning
5. Project Conceived A cooperative effort among eight State grantees, AoA, and the technical consultant, NASUA
A three year effort beginning, September 2005, with development, testing and implementation stages
6. State Planning Grantees Arizona
Florida
Indiana
Kentucky
Minnesota
North Carolina
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
7. Arizona Arizona 2020
Improve coordination & consistency of the State & AAA plans
Use plans as strategic documents to strengthen organizational capacity
Involve other state government agencies
ADRC & Pomp
8. Florida Comprehensive planning model
Uniform data collection, needs assessment & outcome-measurement methodologies
Development of web-accessible national planning database
Involve other state agencies in the planning workgroups
9. Indiana Test the AdvantAge Initiative as a state-level planning model
Design & create comprehensive demographic database
Statewide randomized telephone survey
16 PSA Aging Summits
10. Kentucky New State & Area plan formats
Develop statewide outcomes
Improve coordination of area & state plans
Incorporate new client tracking system into the planning model
11. Minnesota Develop a system-change/service-development planning model
Establish web-based application & reporting system
Develop evidenced-based health promotion programs at the state & local levels
12. New Jersey Develop 3 nutrition program planning models:
Cost effective & efficient program operations
Integration of nutrition plans into the ADRC initiatives
Service delivery for diverse populations
13. North Carolina Coordinated “Logic Model” planning model for state and area plans
Focus on client outcomes
Integrate POMP into the planning model
Link goals and features of AoA Strategic Action Plan to state & AAA planning
14. Pennsylvania Produce standard measurement model for each State Plan objective
Develop local outcome measures
Statewide adoption of Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Standards (CLAS)
“How to” guide on State Plan outcome measures
15. First Year Activities of State Grantees The State PGP grantees have:
Brought together all stakeholders (including other State government agencies) and provided thorough orientation;
Developed/implemented various assessment/survey tools;
Reviewed best practices in areas relevant to each state;
16. 1st Year State Grantee Activities 2 Developed planning formats and upcoming plan updates;
Developed communication tools to enhance project discussions and information dissemination; and
Developed performance measurement strategies
17. 1st Year National Model Activities The Project Resource Center at NASUA has
Developed and disseminated planning research briefs
Convened expert panels
Drafted elements of a national planning model
Provided individual TA to grantee states
18. New Jersey’s Nutrition Project Three teams, each has developed its own logic planning model
Program Operations
Integration into ADRCs
Service to Diverse Populations
19. New Jersey Nutrition Project Program Operations Development of cost model(s) that allows for standardized budgets & reporting
Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of various cost options including purchasing methods, group buying, and volumepurchasing. Cost model
The cost model group evaluated NJ’s current financialreporting system, as well as that of other states that responded to ourinquiries. A proposed budget model was created for C-1 and C-2. The modelwas shared with the NJ4A Finance Committee and then distributed to all AAAsrequesting that they indicate if they currently report in the includedcategories. The responses were tallied and used to develop a draft costmodel.
Cost effectiveness
The cost effectiveness group developed surveyed all counties todetermine their current purchasing protocols. Sample menus were designedand distributed to gauge current pricing for standard menu items. As aresult of their discussion, a recommendation was made to the SUA toconsider revision of the state’s maintenance of effort policy. This recommendation was accepted and the state is currently transitioning to acertification process.
Cost model
The cost model group evaluated NJ’s current financialreporting system, as well as that of other states that responded to ourinquiries. A proposed budget model was created for C-1 and C-2. The modelwas shared with the NJ4A Finance Committee and then distributed to all AAAsrequesting that they indicate if they currently report in the includedcategories. The responses were tallied and used to develop a draft costmodel.
Cost effectiveness
The cost effectiveness group developed surveyed all counties todetermine their current purchasing protocols. Sample menus were designedand distributed to gauge current pricing for standard menu items. As aresult of their discussion, a recommendation was made to the SUA toconsider revision of the state’s maintenance of effort policy. This recommendation was accepted and the state is currently transitioning to acertification process.
20. New Jersey Nutrition Project Integration Into ADRCs Current nutrition program assessment/ intake tools were collected and analyzed
NJ’s ADRC I&A/intake/assessment process tools also analyzed
Gaps identified in the areas of race/ ethnicity, language spoken, and specialdiet needs.
21. New Jersey Nutrition Project Integration Into ADRCs 2 Recommendations developed and forwarded to the ADRC Management Team
ADRC team identified 3 questions to be added to ADRC intake tool to assess need for a nutrition referral
ADRC team developed position paper to support addition of Nutrition Risk Assessment tool to ADRC assessment tool
22. New Jersey Nutrition Project Service to Diverse Populations Assessing current program utilization and local demographics
Assessing provision of cultural competency training to nutrition program staff
Implementing initiatives to improve/expand service delivery to diverse populations.
23. New Jersey Nutrition Planning Grant Contact Gerry McKenzie
Geraldine.mackenzie@doh.state.nj.us
609-943-3499
NJ Department of Health and Senior Services
240 West State Street
P.O. Box 807
Trenton, NJ 08512
24. Minnesota Evidence Based Health Promotion Program A Cross-System Evidence-Based Partnership
Falls prevention initiative with public and private partners
Older Minnesotans:
fewer falls and fall-related injuries
maximizing independence and quality of life
25. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program Objectives Increase awareness of the prevalence of and risk factors for falls
Increase availability of evidence-based falls prevention programs that help older adults gain lower body strength and balance
Increase access to these programs through frequent falls risk assessments and referrals
Increase quality assurance efforts related to falls prevention activities
26. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program Enhanced "YouCan!" Model Developed by the Southeast Minnesota Area Agency on Aging
Conducted at seven congregate dining sites (five in senior housing, one in a community center, and one in a senior center)
Original model: walking program and nutrition education
Additional components: chronic disease self-management education/exercises focused on lower body strength and balance (prevent falls)
27. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program Enhanced "YouCan!" Model 2 Classes taught by teams including certified fitness trainers, physical therapy assistants and health care professionals
Participants: Average age 80-85 years (oldest: 96), 77% live alone, 20% live with spouse, 3% live with other family members
Outcome measures: eating habits, level of physical activity, self-reported health status/ appetite status, personal nutrition/physical activity goals, blood pressure, BMI, Timed Up and Go test, Timed Stands
28. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program Enhanced “YouCan!” Evaluation Individual screening information and group survey results shared with participants
Participants/partners provide group and individual feedback on program structure, content, process
Participants experienced significant improvement in physical activity levels, health status measures and self-reported health
29. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program “You Can!” Lessons Learned Worth the time and effort to track their health status throughout the program - Very motivating (Participants)
Not difficult to ensure confidentiality of individual health information in order to comply with HIPAA requirements
30. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program “You Can!” Next Steps Share evidence with local health care purchasers and clinics
Generate additional funding for the program
Recruit more participants
Expand to additional locations
31. MN Evidence Based Health Promotion Program “You Can!” Programs Contact Kari Benson
Kari.benson@state.mn.us
651-431-2566
MN Board on Aging
P.O. Box 64976
St. Paul, MN 55164-0976
32. Plans for Year 2 and 3 The second and third years of the project will involve field-testing and refining of the State and national models.
The state grantees will be providing ongoing input for the national model from their individual projects, and will be tapped for review and refinement of the model beginning the fall of 2006.
33. National Planning Grants Program Contacts
Deborah Burns
US Administration on Aging
202/357-3581
Deborah.burns@aoa.hhs.gov
James Whaley
Technical Assistance Support Center
202/898-2578 ext 140
jwhaley@nasua.org www.nasua.org/tasc