Collaboration strategies for bridging health, behavioral health, and social services in California's Medi-Cal Whole Person Care Pilot Program.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Services Research Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1111/1475-6773.14417
Emmeline Chuang, Rachel Ross, Nadia Safaeinili, Leigh Ann Haley, Brenna O'Masta, Nadereh Pourat
{"title":"Collaboration strategies for bridging health, behavioral health, and social services in California's Medi-Cal Whole Person Care Pilot Program.","authors":"Emmeline Chuang, Rachel Ross, Nadia Safaeinili, Leigh Ann Haley, Brenna O'Masta, Nadereh Pourat","doi":"10.1111/1475-6773.14417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify collaboration strategies used to integrate health, behavioral health, and social services for Medicaid members in California's Medi-Cal Whole Person Care Pilot program (WPC).</p><p><strong>Data sources and study setting: </strong>WPC was a social care intervention implemented to identify and address eligible members' health, behavioral health, and social needs. Data included semi-structured key informant interviews conducted in 2018-2019 (n = 221) and 2021 (n = 167); pilot-level surveys; whole-network surveys of 507 organizations in all 25 pilots participating in WPC; and documents submitted by pilots to the state. Pilots served a total of 247,887 unique members between 2017 and 2021, the majority of whom were non-white (72%) and over half of whom experienced homelessness.</p><p><strong>Study design/data collection: </strong>Data were collected as part of the statewide evaluation of WPC. We analyzed qualitative data to examine strategies used by pilots to integrate care, network data to identify pilots that improved cross-sector collaboration (i.e., strengthened density or multiplexity of cross-sector ties) following WPC implementation, and comparative case analysis to identify strategies that differentiated pilots that improved collaboration from those that did not.</p><p><strong>Principal findings: </strong>Pilots used multiple strategies to facilitate the integration of care. Network analyses identified 10 pilots that significantly improved either density or multiplexity of cross-sector ties, and one pilot with high cross-sector collaboration prior to WPC. Compared to pilots that did not improve cross-sector collaboration, these pilots meaningfully engaged partners in program design and implementation, used braided funds, and leveraged WPC to support broader systems change. These pilots also reported fewer challenges in developing and managing contractual relationships and ensuring meaningful use of data-sharing infrastructure by frontline staff responsible for care coordination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Data sharing is necessary but not sufficient for systems alignment. Collaboration strategies focused on addressing financial barriers to integration and strengthening normative and interpersonal integration are also needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55065,"journal":{"name":"Health Services Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14417","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To identify collaboration strategies used to integrate health, behavioral health, and social services for Medicaid members in California's Medi-Cal Whole Person Care Pilot program (WPC).

Data sources and study setting: WPC was a social care intervention implemented to identify and address eligible members' health, behavioral health, and social needs. Data included semi-structured key informant interviews conducted in 2018-2019 (n = 221) and 2021 (n = 167); pilot-level surveys; whole-network surveys of 507 organizations in all 25 pilots participating in WPC; and documents submitted by pilots to the state. Pilots served a total of 247,887 unique members between 2017 and 2021, the majority of whom were non-white (72%) and over half of whom experienced homelessness.

Study design/data collection: Data were collected as part of the statewide evaluation of WPC. We analyzed qualitative data to examine strategies used by pilots to integrate care, network data to identify pilots that improved cross-sector collaboration (i.e., strengthened density or multiplexity of cross-sector ties) following WPC implementation, and comparative case analysis to identify strategies that differentiated pilots that improved collaboration from those that did not.

Principal findings: Pilots used multiple strategies to facilitate the integration of care. Network analyses identified 10 pilots that significantly improved either density or multiplexity of cross-sector ties, and one pilot with high cross-sector collaboration prior to WPC. Compared to pilots that did not improve cross-sector collaboration, these pilots meaningfully engaged partners in program design and implementation, used braided funds, and leveraged WPC to support broader systems change. These pilots also reported fewer challenges in developing and managing contractual relationships and ensuring meaningful use of data-sharing infrastructure by frontline staff responsible for care coordination.

Conclusions: Data sharing is necessary but not sufficient for systems alignment. Collaboration strategies focused on addressing financial barriers to integration and strengthening normative and interpersonal integration are also needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加州医疗-加州全人护理试点项目中衔接健康、行为健康和社会服务的合作战略。
目的:确定协作策略,用于整合健康,行为健康和社会服务的医疗补助计划成员在加州的Medi-Cal全人护理试点计划(WPC)。数据来源和研究背景:WPC是一项社会护理干预,旨在识别和解决符合条件的成员的健康、行为健康和社会需求。数据包括2018-2019年(n = 221)和2021年(n = 167)进行的半结构化关键信息提供者访谈;试验级调查;参与WPC的25个试点中507个组织的全网调查;以及飞行员向州政府提交的文件。2017年至2021年期间,飞行员共为247887名独立成员提供服务,其中大多数是非白人(72%),其中一半以上经历过无家可归。研究设计/数据收集:收集数据作为全州WPC评估的一部分。我们分析了定性数据,以检验试点在整合护理方面使用的策略;分析了网络数据,以确定试点在实施WPC后改善了跨部门合作(即加强了跨部门联系的密度或多样性);比较案例分析,以确定哪些试点改善了合作,哪些试点没有。主要发现:试点使用多种策略来促进护理的整合。网络分析确定了10个试点项目,它们显著提高了跨部门联系的密度或多样性,一个试点项目在WPC之前具有高度的跨部门协作。与没有改善跨部门协作的试点项目相比,这些试点项目有意义地让合作伙伴参与到项目设计和实施中,使用编织基金,并利用WPC来支持更广泛的系统变革。这些试点还报告说,在发展和管理合同关系以及确保负责护理协调的一线工作人员有意义地使用数据共享基础设施方面,面临的挑战较少。结论:数据共享是必要的,但不足以实现系统一致性。还需要协作战略,侧重于解决一体化的财务障碍,并加强规范和人际一体化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Services Research
Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
193
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Services Research (HSR) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that provides researchers and public and private policymakers with the latest research findings, methods, and concepts related to the financing, organization, delivery, evaluation, and outcomes of health services. Rated as one of the top journals in the fields of health policy and services and health care administration, HSR publishes outstanding articles reporting the findings of original investigations that expand knowledge and understanding of the wide-ranging field of health care and that will help to improve the health of individuals and communities.
期刊最新文献
Patient-Provider Race Concordance and Primary Care Suicide Risk Screening in the Veterans Health Administration. Recruitment and Retention of Rural Health Professionals in Minnesota. Identifying Barriers to Being Offered and Accepting a Telehealth Visit for Cancer Care: Unpacking the Multi-Levels of Documented Racial Disparities in Telehealth Use. Integrated health systems and medical care quality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing Staffing Shortages in Nursing Homes: Does Relaxing Training and Licensing Requirements Increase Nurse Aide Staffing?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1