Work Force and PCAs DelRay Florida November 2008.
-
Upload
patricia-mathews -
Category
Documents
-
view
222 -
download
0
Transcript of Work Force and PCAs DelRay Florida November 2008.
Work Force and PCAs
DelRay Florida
November 2008
Agenda
Background Survey Results & Analysis Best Practices Recruitment Pros & Cons Next Steps
The Work Force (WF) Workgroup
Formed in Spring 2008 Response to prioritization process by
PCA/NACHC Steering Committee Broad-based representation Considered information flow across other WF
activities
Workgroup Composition
Members:– Annette Kowal, Co-Chair– Joe Pierle, Co-Chair– Sonya Bruton – Shawn Frick– Bruce Gray– Kevin Lewis
– Mary Looker– Patrick Monahan– Tom Curtin– Joe Gallegos– John Sawyer– Suzanne Rossel
Purpose/Charge
The WF Workgroup examined the role of PCAs in supporting Health Centers’ (HCs) WF issues and identified recommendations for. As part of this charge, the Workgroup considered a series of questions: 1. What is the appropriate role(s) for PCAs in the WF
arena?2. What are some examples of successful PCA efforts to
positively impact WF issues?3. What are the barriers or challenges that PCAs will
need to address?4. What are the kind of resources and assistance PCAs
will need to address the concerns identified in #3, above?
Work to Date
Developed and Implemented Survey Assessed Additional Information thru Follow-
up Questions Undertook Multi-tiered Analyses Coordinated with other WF activities Identified Best Practices Outlined Next Steps for Developing Long-Term
Strategies
Survey Summary
33 Survey Respondents; Targeted follow up on “one-time” funding
yielded an additional 3 responses;
Work Force: the Differing Views
Survey Results: WF Efforts Vary Across PCAs
PCA Board WF Committee– A limited number of respondents, 18%, indicated
that they had a Board WF-focused Committee – Charges for the committees included:
Recruitment & retentionClinical support--clinical performance measures,
recruitment & retentionCHC competency and new staff orientationNewly formed committee, focus to be determined
PCA Staffing:– 100% of PCA respondents indicated that they had WF
staff:The average number of staff positions = 1.7The average FTEs = .9The highest FTE = 3.0 FTEsThe lowest FTE = 0.05 FTEs24% of PCAs had less than a 0.5 FTE
– 18% utilized consultants for some aspect of WF– Titles and responsibilities varied widely
Survey Results: WF Staffing Varies Across PCAs
Many identified a strong PCA recruitment role:– 70% of all PCA respondents undertake
recruitment efforts on behalf of HCs– Providers (physicians, dentists, mid-levels and
behavioral health clinicians) are predominantly recruited by PCAs
– Nearly 50% of respondents undertake senior leadership recruitment on behalf of HCs
Survey Results: PCAs Focus on Recruitment
A Variety of Recruitment Definitions:– Recruitment activities include a wide breadth of
services:PCA staff recruit Health Center providers and staffHC Recruitment is Contracted/Collaborative On-line job posting/Internet career placement Job FairsCoordination with NHSC and SEARCH program
Survey Results: PCAs Focus on Recruitment
PCA retention effort were limited:– 27% of PCA respondents indicated that TA was
provided to support the development of HC incentive based compensation plan.
– Several other retention activities identified were undertaken by only one PCA respondent each:
Learning teamsCompensation, benchmarking, salary surveyTraining programs through distance learning and/or
at annual conferences
Survey Results: Limited PCA Focus on Retention
Limited PCA mentoring activities were identified:– 33% indicated they provide some mentoring
across various areas:12% (of total respondents) are involved SEARCH
program activities6% developed handbooks/toolkitsNHSC, programs for youth, and meetings were
identified as mentoring activities by select PCAs
Survey Results: Few Mentoring Activities
Survey Results: PCA Pipeline Activities are Limited
Limited Pipeline Activities were identified:– 12% work with the SEARCH program;– 21% indicated collaboration/work with AHECs;– Limited visits to residency/training programs.
Survey Results: Resources
It is clear that WF issues are involved and weighty.
Currently, resources to support PCA WF efforts are limited.
Survey Results: Resources (Funding)
PCAs depend on BPHC for WF funds (97%) Members’ dues (46%) and fees (18%) support PCAs’
WF activities Other Federal (HRSA-27%) and State (21%) funding
is utilized for WF Other support identified comes through:
– Dept. of Labor Pass through– Private Foundations– AHECs
One-Time (HRSA/BPHC) Funding Uses (36 respondents)– 47% recruitment supplies & materials, etc.– 36% Targeted T/TA– 31% (As of 6/08) had not determined use– 31% Building/Strengthening partnerships &
collaborations
Survey Results: Resources(One-Time BPHC Funding)
Survey Results: Resources(Collaborations)
Collaboration
Average: 1: Limited; 2: Good; 3: Close
Number of Respondents (total possible= 33)
PCO 2.18 30 AHEC 1.62 30 State Health Depts 1.82 30 Medical Society 0.88 26 Dental Society 0.79 26 Training Pgms Limited 1.53 26 Medical Schools 1.24 29 Dental Schools 1.26 30 Residencies 1.32 29 Vocational Schools 0.53 22 NACHC 1.82 28 HRSA WF Collaborative 1.29 26 Clinical Networks 0.88 22
PCO seen by PCAs as a strong partner Limited partnerships/collaborations were
noted with:– Medical & Dental Societies– Medical & Dental Schools– Residency Programs
Survey Results: Resources(Collaborations)
PCAs identified a wide range of joint collaborations, select top efforts included:– 39% Recruiting– 30% Building/Enhancing Strategic Partnerships– 30% Developing/Implementing HC training/tools– 27% Building Relationships with Higher
Education/Residencies
Survey Results: Resources(Collaborations)
Survey Results: Many WF Barriers were Identified:
Barrier
# of times Identified (out of possible 33)
Average: 1 biggest barrier to 5 least
Competition by other providers 23 2.57 Geographic Isolation--poor, economically deprived 21 2.00 Lack of focus on PC in training & residency pgms. 20 3.25 Lack of Funds 19 1.89 Lack of competitive salaries 17 3.18 Geographic Isolation--retention 14 2.86 Resistance from Medical and/or Dental schools 11 3.73 Lack of residency program 10 3.80 Member understanding/resistance 9 4.33 Spouse employment 7 3.86 Inadequate training programs 7 3.57 Housing 6 3.33
Best Practices
Pipeline:– Florida: PCA and AHEC collaboration– Mississippi: Rotation of medical and dental
students through HCs using Medicaid carve-out
Best Practices
Retention– 27% of PCA respondents indicated that TA was
provided to support the development of HC incentive based compensation plan
– 82% of respondents expressed some success with State loan repayment/redemption/tuition reimbursement program or provider incentives.
Best Practices
Recruitment– Referral approach in NM, TN, WY– MO approach to contracting with contingency
search firms
Recruitment—Pros & Cons
Pros– Addresses vacancy
issues in the short-term– Has quantifiable
outcome– Responds to members
needs/requests
Cons– Short-term focus of
limited resources on long-term and growing issue
– PCA Effectiveness against professional firms
– PCA limited/no control post placement-retention
Next Steps
Continue the “conversation;”– Define key terms/concepts– Develop high-level/best practice models for:
Recruitment Retention Pipeline
– PCA Work Force Development Summit Identify strategies to communicate among and
between key HRSA Bureaus; Continue to Coordinate with existing work force
workgroups and initiatives.