These questions can be used to create surveys for evaluation purposes. The benefit of using these question is that the results can be submitted to the Bree Collaborative to compare and validate your responses.
These questions can be used to create surveys for evaluation purposes. The benefit of using these question is that the results can be submitted to the Bree Collaborative to compare and validate your responses.
Answer Options:
1) …no awareness of Bree Collaborative Guidelines
2) …basic level of awareness; content not known
3) …general awareness; some specific content known
4) …advanced knowledge of awareness; content known and staff interest in implementation
Format: Scale for each answer option and total score 1-10
Scale or Measurement: Count of answers in each strata
a) 1
b) 2-4
c) 5-7
d) 8-10
Status: In review
Audience: General, Delivery site staff, other TBD
Notes: This survey tool called the “Bree Collaborative Behavioral Health Integration Assessment” was created by Bree staff in 2020 based on the MeHAF to capture general awareness of Bree Guidelines in conjunction with surveys of adoption of behavioral health integration measures. More information here.
Answer Options:
1) …no interest in Guideline Implementation
2) …actively considering Guideline Implementation
3) ..some steps taken toward Guideline Implementation; test cycles beginning
4) ..actively working toward Guideline Implementation; team formed and test cycles ongoing
Format: Scale for each answer option and total score 1-10
Scale or Measurement: Count of answers in each strata
a) 1
b) 2-4
c) 5-7
d) 8-10
Status: In review
Audience: General, Delivery site staff, Other TBD
Notes: This survey tool called the “Bree Collaborative Behavioral Health Integration Assessment” was created by Bree staff in 2020 based on the MeHAF to capture general interest in adopting Bree Guidelines in conjunction with surveys of adoption of behavioral health integration measures. More information here.
Answer Options:
a) no action on Bree Guidelines
b) in the process of creating an implementation plan
c) executed an implementation
d) evaluated an implementation
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count
Status: In use, un-validated
Audience: General, CEO, COO, Bree work group members, Other TBD
Note: This question is part of the Transformation and Outreach managers survey of Bree work groups.
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
1) The project schedule was realistic.
2) Strategies to keep the project on schedule were effective.
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Question QB4a: What helped the project remain on schedule?
Answer Options: Open text
Question QB4b: What prevented the project from remaining on schedule?
Answer Options: Open text
Question QB4c: What strategies were used to help the project stay on schedule?
Answer Options: Open text
Question QB4d: What staff roles were required or used to design and execute the implementation?
Answer Options: Open text (also consider drop downs for selected roles)
Question QB4e: What staff roles were affected by the implementation?
Answer Options: Open text (also consider drop downs for selected roles)
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options: open text
Format: Single line response
Scale or Measurement: Post survey groupings to the nearest 10K
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Yes
No
I don’t know
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options: open text
Format: Single line response
Scale or Measurement: Post survey groupings to the nearest half full time equivalent
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
QC4 Introduction: From your perspective:
Question QC4a: If the project came in under budget, how were savings made?
Answer Options: open text
Question QC4b: If the project ran over budget, why did this happen?
Answer Options: open text
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item Rating (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select, select with multiple line text
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion, qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating (Strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
QD2 Introduction: From your perspective
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating (Strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Scale for each answer option
Scale or Measurement:
Status: Used as part of a Behavioral Health Integration Assessment Tool
Audience: Medical Directors, practitioners, nurses, MA’s, other clinical staff, Other TBD
Notes: this question is from the Bree Collaborative BH Integration Assessment tool
Answer Options:
N/A
Format: open text
Scale or Measurement: qualitative word coding
Status: in use
Audience: Community health center staff
Notes: from the Building Capacity for Equity Informed Planning and Evaluation (BCEIPE) Project, (list owner) Full survey
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating (Strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: Item 1-2 general, Item 3 clinical staff, Other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating
Scale or Measurement: Scale of 1-5 for each answer item
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating
Scale or Measurement: Scale of 1-5 for each answer item, 1= novice, 2= advanced beginner, 3= Competent, 4= Proficient, 5= Expert
Status: In use
Audience: general
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating
Scale or Measurement: Scale of 1-5 for each answer item, 1= novice, 2= advanced beginner, 3= Competent, 4= Proficient, 5= Expert
Status: In use
Audience: general
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating (Strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members
Notes:
Answer Options: Open text
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members, Other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Top three select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: General
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion, qualitative word coding
Status: In use
Audience: Bree work group members, Health Equity Action Collaborative, others
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion, qualitative word coding
Status: In use
Audience: Bree work group members, Health Equity Action Collaborative, others
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: multiple select, open text
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion, qualitative word coding
Status: In use
Audience: Bree work group members, Other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Never, rarely, sometimes, often, always
Format: single select
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In use
Audience: Community health center staff, can be use for other organizations
Notes: from the Building Capacity for Equity Informed Planning and Evaluation (BCEIPE) Project, (list owner) Full survey
Answer Options:
Format: rating for each answer option
Scale or Measurement: Likert, Scale 1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= neutral, 4= agree, 5= strongly agree
Status: In use
Audience: General
Notes:
SURVEY QUESTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT
SURVEY QUESTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT
Answer Options: open text
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
A. Time
B. Cost
C. Lack of business case and/or evidence economic reward
D. Lack of personnel
E. Lack of availabile and credibile of data
F. Lack of Implementation metrics
G. Lack of infrastructure capacity (e.g., EHR system, broadband issues, lack of integration with behavioral health systems etc.)
H. Lack of staff or leadership buy-in
I. Lack of staff knowledge
J. Staff attitudes
K. Lack of alignment with other priorities
L. Lack of guidelines specific factors (e.g., evidence, plausibility, complexity, applicability.
M. Other priorities (Please explain)
Format: Multiple select, long text
Scale or Measurement: count, percent, proportion, qualitative word count
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members, Other TBD
Notes:
A. Time
B. Cost
C. Business case-evidence and/or economic reward
D. Sufficient personnel
E. Availability and credibility of data
F. Implementation metrics
G. Infrastructure capacity EHR system, broadband issues, lack of integration with behavioral health systems etc.)
H. Staff or leadership buy-in
I. Staff knowledge
J. Staff attitudes
K. Alignment with other priorities
L. Guidelines specific factors (e.g., evidence, plausibility, complexity, applicability)
M. Other priorities (Please explain)
Format: Multiple select, long text
Scale or Measurement: count, percent, proportion, qualitative word count
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members, general, other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Grid, item ranking
Scale or Measurement: High relevance, Moderate Relevance, Low/no relevance
Status: In use
Audience: Clinicians and QI staff
Notes:
Answer Options:
Question QN1a: If stated “yes”, please list which report topic(s) and what motivated you or your organization to utilize the guidelines?
Answer Options: Open text
Question QN1b: If stated “no”, why do you not plan to utilize or did not use the Bree Collaborative Guidelines?
Answer Options: Open text
Format: single select, multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion, Qualitative word coding
Status: Validation in process, using a one-tailed z-test for proportions with a hypothesized proportion of 50% responding yes.
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options: Open text
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members, Other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item rating (Strongly disagree to strongly agree)
If you answered strong disagree to disagree for X question above, how did projected benefits not match the actual benefits?
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: Bree work group members, other TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options:
1) The guidelines were complementary to indigenous and local cultural health practices.
2) The guidelines were antagonistic to indigenous and local cultural health practices.
Format: Item Ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Audience: TBD
Status: In review
Notes:
Answer Options:
Question QP5b: If yes, please provide the name of the survey you use.
Answer Options: open text
Format: Single select, multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
Answer Options: open text
Format: Multiple line response
Scale or Measurement: Qualitative word coding
Status: In review
Audience: TBD
Notes:
SURVEY QUESTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT
SURVEY QUESTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS, https://healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/deep-interoperability-in-healthcare
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS, https://healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/deep-interoperability-in-healthcare
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS, https://healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/deep-interoperability-in-healthcare
Answer Options:
Format: Single select
Scale or measurement: Count, percent, proportion
Status: In review
Audience: CIO, Other TBD
Notes: adapted from KLAS, https://healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/deep-interoperability-in-healthcare
Answer Options:
Format: Checkbox
Scale or Measurement: Count, percent, proportion,
Status: In use
Audience: Community health center staff, can be use for other organizations
Notes: from the Building Capacity for Equity Informed Planning and Evaluation (BCEIPE) Project, (list owner) Full survey
Answer Options:
Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In use
Audience: Community health center staff, can be use for other organizations
Notes: from the Building Capacity for Equity Informed Planning and Evaluation (BCEIPE) Project, (list owner) Full survey
Answer Options:
Stage 0 – Limited or no e-communication
Stage 1 – Basic peer-to-peer data exchange
Stage 2 – Patient centered clinical data using basic system-to-system exchange
Stage 3 – Normalised patient record using structural interoperability
Stage 4 – Care coordination based on actionable data using a semantic interoperable patient record
Stage 5 – Community-wide patient records using applied information with patient engagement focus
Stage 6 – Closed loop care coordination across care team members
Stage 7 – Knowledge driven engagement for dynamic, multi-vendor, multi-organisational interconnected healthcare delivery model
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: count, percent
Status: In use
Audience: CIOs, others TBD
Notes: This question has been adapted from the HIMSS HL7 models
Answer Options:
Stage 0 – Fragmented point solutions
Stage 1 – Foundation building: data aggregation and initial data governance
Stage 2 – Core data warehouse workout: centralised database with an analytics competency center
Stage 3 – Efficient, consistent internal and external report production and agility
Stage 4 – Measuring and managing evidence based care, care visibility, and waste reduction
Stage 5 – Enhancing quality of care, population health, and understanding the economics of care
Stage 6 – Clinical risk intervention & predictive analytics
Stage 7 – Personalized medicine & prescriptive analytics
Format: Single select
Scale or Measurement: Count, percentage
Status: In use
Audience: CIOs, other TBD
Notes: This question has been adapted from the HIMSS HL7 models
Answer Options:
1) The use of the guidelines increased my/our understanding of what data should be captured and shared with others on my/our team.
2) From my perspective, the use of the guidelines guidelines increased our organizations ability to implement data sharing solutions with other partners.
3) The use of the guidelines increased our organizations ability to implement analytics capabilities.
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In use
Audience: CIOs, other TBD
Notes: This question is being used for Bree Collaborative Evaluation activities.
Answer Options:
1) The goals for referrals were were clear in all guidelines we used.
2) The goals for data transparency (such as sharing information with patients) were clear in all the guidelines we used.
3) The goals for data standardization were clear in all of the guidelines we used.
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In use
Audience: CIOs, other TBD
Notes: This question is being used for Bree Collaborative Evaluation activities.
Answer Options:
1) The goals for data aggregation capabilities were clear in all guidelines we used.
2) The goals for data collection were clear in all of the guidelines we used.
3) The goals for population health management (such as sharing information with patients) were clear in all the guidelines we used.
Format: Item ranking (strongly disagree to strongly agree)
Scale or Measurement: Likert
Status: In use
Audience: CIOs, other TBD
Notes: This question is being used for Bree Collaborative Evaluation activities.
Answer Options:
Format: Single Select
Scale or Measurement: Count or percent
Status: In use
Audience: general
Notes:
Answer Options:
Format: rating
Scale or Measurement: Likert scale; Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
Status: In review
Audience: General
Notes:
These questions were used by the NCHS to evaluate technology usability.