Fostering Partnerships with the Safety Net: An Evaluation of Kaiser Permanente's Community Ambassador Program in the Mid-Atlantic States.

INTRODUCTION: Kaiser Permanente (KP) Mid-Atlantic States has partnered with communities in its service area since 2011 to provide health services to underserved individuals. As part of KP's Community Benefit investment, the Community Ambassador Program places KP advanced-practice clinicians in safety-net clinics to share best practices and to improve access and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To report program outcomes and disseminate lessons learned. METHODS: Using data from participating clinics, we retrospectively evaluated the program and estimated Community Ambassadors' contributions to clinic capacity, patient access, evidence-based care, and clinical quality measures. Furthermore, we conducted 29 semistructured phone interviews with stakeholders. Questions focused on program benefits, challenges, learning, and sustainability. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2017, Community Ambassadors filled up to 32.8 full-time equivalent positions and conducted 294,436 patient encounters in 19 clinics. In certain years and for subsets of clinics, Community Ambassadors performed above average on 2 high-priority quality measures: Cervical cancer screening for women aged 21 to 64 years and diabetes (blood glucose) control. Interviews with 15 Community Ambassadors, 15 health centers leaders, and 7 KP Mid-Atlantic States staff members revealed that Community Ambassadors improved patient access, clinic capacity, and care quality. Ambassadors also exported KP best practices and supported KP's community relations. Challenges included patient acuity, clinic resources, staff turnover, and long-term sustainability. CONCLUSION: The Community Ambassador Program achieved its goals and had clear benefits, offering a model for large health care systems wanting to collaborate with community-based clinics. Careful planning is needed to ensure that positive results are sustained.

Engaging patients in primary care design: An evaluation of a novel approach to codesigning care.

OBJECTIVE: Recognition is growing that to create truly patient-centred care, health-care organizations need to partner with patients around care design. More research into the benefits of engaging patients and the most effective ways of partnering with them is needed. METHODS: This study assessed the process and impact of a collaborative effort to design a new clinic service that balanced the number of patient and clinical provider/staff codesigners involved and recruited patients to represent diverse perspectives. Data sources included interviews with participants, event observation and participant surveys. RESULTS: Our evaluation found that including patients as equal partners improved the design process by infusing a real-world, patient perspective. The pre-event orientation and interactive methods used in the event fostered positive collaboration, as well as personal growth for the patient codesigners. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the feasibility and benefits of including a roughly equal number of patients and clinical providers/staff in design events and ensuring that the patients represent diverse perspectives.

Evaluation of the Learning to Integrate Neighborhoods and Clinical Care Project: Findings from Implementing a New Lay Role into Primary Care Teams to Address Social Determinants of Health.

INTRODUCTION: Health systems increasingly recognize the impact of social determinants of health such as access to housing, transportation, and nutritious food. Lay health workers have been used to address patients' social determinants of health through resource referral and goal setting in targeted populations, such as individuals with diabetes. However, we know of no studies that evaluate this type of role for a general primary care population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the implementation and impact of the Community Resource Specialist (CRS) role in Kaiser Permanente Washington. METHODS: We analyzed data from staff interviews, patient focus groups, clinic site visits, patient surveys, the electronic health record, and administrative sources. RESULTS: Satisfaction with CRSs was high, with 92% of survey respondents choosing "very satisfied" or "somewhat satisfied." Of patients with a resource referral and follow-up encounter, 45% reported using the resource (n = 229) and 86% who set a goal and had a follow-up encounter (n = 218) progressed toward their goal. Primary care teams reported workload easing. Patients who used CRSs and participated in focus groups reported behavior changes and improved health, although no changes were detected from electronic health records or patient survey data. Key learnings include the need to clearly define the CRS role, ensure high visibility to clinical staff, and facilitate personal introductions of patients (warm handoffs). CONCLUSION: Adding an individual to the primary care team with expertise in community resources can increase patient satisfaction, support clinicians, and improve patients' perceptions of their health and well-being.

The Immunity Community: A Community Engagement Strategy for Reducing Vaccine Hesitancy.

Parental concerns about vaccine safety have grown in the United States and abroad, resulting in delayed or skipped immunizations (often called "vaccine hesitancy"). To address vaccine hesitancy in Washington State, a public-private partnership of health organizations implemented and evaluated a 3-year community intervention, called the "Immunity Community." The intervention mobilized parents who value immunization and provided them with tools to engage in positive dialogue about immunizations in their communities. The evaluation used qualitative and quantitative methods, including focus groups, interviews, and pre and post online surveys of parents, to assess perceptions about and reactions to the intervention, assess facilitators and barriers to success, and track outcomes including parental knowledge and attitudes. The program successfully engaged parent volunteers to be immunization advocates. Surveys of parents in the intervention communities showed statistically significant improvements in vaccine-related attitudes: The percentage concerned about other parents not vaccinating their children increased from 81.2% to 88.6%, and the percentage reporting themselves as "vaccine-hesitant" decreased from 22.6% to 14.0%. There were not statistically significant changes in parental behaviors. This study demonstrates the promise of using parent advocates as part of a community-based approach to reduce vaccine hesitancy.