Oregon ACT Program Evaluation - Focus Group Surveys -

1. Oregon ACT Program Evaluation - Focus Group Surveys - Oregon Center of Excellence for Assertive Community Treatment (OCEACT) Heidi herinckx and Alyssa Kerlinger 2017-2018

2. Focus Groups • 156 ACT participants total • Focus groups ranged from 1-12 participants and almost every ACT team participated • Length: 1 hour • 30 minutes for open-ended questions • 30 minutes for survey/assessments • $20 grocery store gift card incentive

3. Is the focus group sample representative of the entire ACT population?

4. Demographic Comparison for Representativeness Average Years in ACT Average Age of ACT Participants Percentage Hospitalized

5. Demographic Comparison for Representativeness Gender Race/Ethnicity

6. Demographic Comparison for Representativeness Percentage of Days Homeless Percentage of Medication Use • Hospitalization

7. Demographic Comparison for RepresentativenessACT Team Breakdown by Population Density

8. Demographic Comparison for Representativeness Population Density Comparison

9. How Representative is the Focus Group Sample? • Representative: • Average Age – 44 years old • Average Years in ACT – 2 years • Race/ethnicity breakdown • Homeless – when compared as yes/no – (homeless or not) • Focus Group Sample Differences: • Population Density: overrepresented rural teams • Gender: slightly more males • Medication – Focus Group Samples were more likely to take their medications and like taking them. • Hospitalizations: less hospitalizations then the rest of the population.

10. Social Support Assessment • Roommate • Friend • Family • Children • Significant Other • Spiritual/Religious Group • Co-worker • Neighbor

11. Social SupportDo you have a relationship with these social supports? Total: 156 Focus Group Participants

12. Social Support Which social supports did people most report having a relationship with?*Focus Group Sample= 156 peopleRanked from most to least: • Friend (n=134) • Family (n=126) • Neighbor (n=80) • Child (n=63) • Spiritual or Religious Group (n=57) • Roommate (n=57) • Significant Other (n=50) • Co-worker (n=29)

13. Social SupportHow many different kind of social supports do people report they have a relationship with? Total # of Social Supports

14. Social SupportIf reported ‘yes’ to having a relationship - Is your relationship positive, negative, or both?

15. Social Support How often do you spend time with each social support?

16. Social Support How often are people spending time with their social supports?

17. Social SupportHow satisfied are people with their relationships? • ***Ordered by highest satisfaction rate. • High satisfaction rates • Children (41%), Significant Other (22%) and Family (24%) were the top 3 relationships that people were least satisfied with.

18. Social Support Do you want to improve your relationship or have a relationship?

19. Social SupportWould you like to have a relationship or improve your relationship? (this includes those who reported not having a relationship) % of ACT Participants

20. Social Support Summary • Out of 156 focus group participants, the most frequent relationships they reported having were family (n=126) and friends (134). Co-workers were the least frequently reported relationship by the focus group participants (n=29). • Out of 8 different kinds of social supports that were asked about, the majority of participants reported having between 3-5 different kinds of social supports. Describe relationship: • Spending time with social supports every week if not more! • High satisfaction rates across almost all social supports. Top 3 most satisfied with Friends, Spiritual and religious group, and roommates. Participants reported low dissatisfaction rates (all under 18%) except: • Children (41%), Significant Other (22%) and Family (24%) were the top 3 relationships that people were least satisfied with. • Improve/Build Relationship: • Children (top rated for those who have children) • Family • Friends • Significant other

21. Recovery Self-Assessment

22. Recovery Self-Assessment

23. Recovery Self-Assessment Compare Average Fidelity Intensity of Service Score with RSA #3 ‘contact done in the community’ average response

24. Illness Management and Recovery Assessment

25. IMR Assessment

26. IMR AssessmentHow did participants’ responses to ‘how often do you take your medication as prescribed?’ compare to OAD medication adherence reporting?

27. ConclusionMain Takeaways: • The majority of participants are seeing social supports weekly or daily! • Only 1% reported having NO social supports! (majority report 3-5) • Participants value working on and improving their social relationships, even if they already have them. • Children, Family and Significant Other relationships are the lease satisfactory and the relationships that most participants want to improve. • ACT Participants feel like their ACT teams are helping them work towards their recovery well. • Rural and Urban participants see a lower score in their Illness Management and Recovery average scores. • ACT teams are accurately able to reflect participant’s medication use.

28. More program evaluation info to be shared at the conference… Hope to see you there!