Darren Kaw, MPHPublic Health Prevention Specialist Fellow

dkaw@cdc.gov770-488-5180

Arthritis Council CallAugust 3rd, 2010

Arthritis Grantee Needs AssessmentArthritis Grantee Needs Assessment Survey Results, 2010 Survey Results, 2010

OutlineOutline

Background Survey topics Respondents’ characteristics

Results Training needs Top methods for technical assistance Top needs from CDC Top barriers Top programmatic strengths

Survey TopicsSurvey Topics Knowledge and Skills

Usage of current resources and tools Technical assistance topics

Assistance Topics respondents want to learn from peers

Partnerships Ability to access support for programs Barriers to partnerships with external organizations Capacity within own state health department

Methods Forms of live, “real time” training or TA which are appealing Forms of self-study or TA which are appealing Products or tools that serve as TA which are appealing

Respondent CharacteristicsRespondent Characteristics

76% response rate (37/49)

76% of respondents were from CDC-funded programs

Most were project coordinators or managers (46%)

54% of respondents have two or less years of experience in their arthritis program

Training NeedsTraining Needs

Topics rated as a “High need” or "Moderate need” “Developing a business case for arthritis interventions”

selected by 80% (28/35) of respondents• CDC-states may see this as a higher need than AID-states• Less experienced respondents may see this as a higher need

than more experienced respondents.

“Using data to persuade different types of decision makers”, selected by 80% (28/35) of respondents • CDC-states may see this as a higher need than AID-states• More experienced respondents may see this as a higher

need than less experienced respondents.* “less experienced” is defined as having two or less years experience in the respondent’s arthritis program while “more experienced is having three or more years experience

Training Needs cont’dTraining Needs cont’d

Topics rated as a “Low need” to learn “Resources for managing CDC or NACDD cooperative

agreements” and selected by 38% (14/37) of respondents• CDC states may see this as a higher need than AID states• Less experienced respondents may see this as a higher

need than more experienced respondents

“Requirements for licensing of certain programs”, selected by 39% (14/36) of respondents • CDC states may see this as a higher need than AID states• Less experienced respondents may see this as a higher

need than more experienced respondents

Training topics as indicated by Training topics as indicated by respondentsrespondents

Topic High/moderate need Low need

% of responsesN % of

responsesN

Developing a business case for arthritis interventions 80% 35 14% 35Using data to persuade different types of decision makers 80% 35 14% 35Embedding arthritis programs in partner systems and activities 78% 37 11% 37

Beginning to develop policy initiatives 77% 35 11% 35Provider outreach participant recruitment strategies 76% 37 11% 37

Media advocacy 74% 35 14% 35

CDC data products and sources 51% 35 29% 35

Project management 41% 34 35% 34Requirements for licensing of certain programs 33% 36 39% 36Resources for managing CDC or NACDD cooperative agreements 32% 37 38% 37

Training Needs: Learning from other Training Needs: Learning from other statesstates

Most popular topics: “Identifying system partners and initiating

collaborations” at 74% (25/37) “Policy or systems changes” 71% (24/37)

Least popular topics: “Experiences using the health communication

campaign” 35% (12/37) “Maintaining and working with an arthritis-specific

advisory group” 38% (13/37)

Methods: forms of live, “real time” Methods: forms of live, “real time” training or technical assistancetraining or technical assistance

Overall, respondents seem to find real time training or TA appealing

Most appealing forms in % “Very appealing” “In person at grantee meeting”, 63% (22/35) “In person as part of another

meeting/conference/training session”, 57% (20/35)

“Peer-to-peer discussions and presentations”, 46% (16/35)

Least appealing in % “Not very appealing” Arthritis Council calls and live satellite broadcast,

both at14% (5/35)

Methods: forms of live, “real time” Methods: forms of live, “real time” training or technical assistancetraining or technical assistance

Written comments noted limitations of these training options Grantee meeting: funding limited # of staff who could

attend Conference calls/webinars: competing sessions between

different organizations and grant projects Other issues

Suggestion of vetting process for materials to ensure they are timely, relevant, and informative

Limit length of webinars, conference calls, and media-based trainings to 45 – 60 minutes

Avoid forwarding emails without context

Preferred forms of live, “real time” Preferred forms of live, “real time” training or technical assistancetraining or technical assistance

Forms of live, “real time” training or TA

Very appealing Somewhat appealing

Not very appealing

% of response

s

N % of response

s

N % of response

s

N

In person at grantee meeting 63% 35 23% 35 3% 35In person as part of another meeting/conference/ training session 57% 35 23% 35 3% 35Peer-to-peer discussions and presentations 46% 35 40% 35 6% 35Arthritis Council calls 23% 35 34% 35 14% 35Live satellite broadcast 11% 35 51% 35 14% 35

Methods: forms of self-study training or Methods: forms of self-study training or technical assistancetechnical assistance

Overall, respondents seem to prefer real time training or TA more than self-study training

Most appealing forms in % “Very appealing” “Recorded webinar”, 37% (13/35) “Web-based interactive courses”, 29% (10/35)

Least appealing in % “Not very appealing” “Podcasts, Twitter, Facebook, or other social media

feeds or forums”, 46% (16/35) “Web forum and/or blogs to receive and share

information with peers”, 34% (12/35)

Methods: forms of self-study training or Methods: forms of self-study training or technical assistancetechnical assistance

Written comments mentioned the difficulty in finding time to utilize these tools, but that it may be ideal for some people.

One respondent cautioned against using social media if only because it is new and exciting.

Preferred forms of self-study training Preferred forms of self-study training or technical assistanceor technical assistance

Forms of self-study training or TA

Very appealing Somewhat appealing

Not very appealing

% of response

s

N % of response

s

N % of response

s

N

Recorded webinar 37% 35 46% 35 11% 35Web-based interactive courses 29% 35 46% 35 14% 35Podcasts, Twitter, Facebook, or other social media feeds or forums 9% 35 14% 35 46% 35Web forum and/or blogs to receive and share information with peers 11% 35 34% 35 34% 35

Methods: Products or tools to serve Methods: Products or tools to serve technical assistance or teaching aidestechnical assistance or teaching aides

Respondents want materials that can promote program effectiveness and benefits Can be used to strengthen the need for

interventions Marketing materials

Problem with AF’s marketing tools Desire for additional marketing tools for

Enhanced Fitness, CDSMP, and other non-AF programs

Products or tools to serve as technical Products or tools to serve as technical assistance or training aidesassistance or training aides

Products/tools Very appealing

Somewhat appealing

Not very appealing

% of response

s

N% of

responses

N % of response

s

N

Quick reference guides 49% 35 40% 35 3% 35Fact sheets 37% 35 51% 35 6% 35Written materials to study 12% 34 50% 34 21% 34Scripts to use with partners 19% 32 38% 32 16% 32

Needs from CDCNeeds from CDC

Increased funding From both AID and CDC-states, larger proportion of AID-states

though Sustainability

Federal support through CMS funds, US Preventative Task Force recommendation, data on return on investment or cost-effectiveness

Networking with other states Seen as way to share successes, struggles, and lessons

learned Recommendation for a 2nd grantee meeting during the year

via webinar or satellite Setting time at conference for networking

Needs from CDCNeeds from CDC

Clarity with program requirements Requested by CDC-funded states Several respondents would like clear language in the

grant announcement regarding mandatory travel to the grantee conference

Reporting requirements not very clear• Recommendation that new guidance should be

communicated via teleconference or webcast along with discussion time with project officers

Top challenges faced by the programTop challenges faced by the program

Funding Lack of interest or commitment from partners

Lack of funding for partners Lack of staff time and resources to develop partnerships Reorganization of a local AF chapter Competition for partners for advisory groups Turf issues from ARRA funding

Increasing the number of program participants Several respondents identified building brand recognition as a

challenge related to participant recruitment

Grantee barriers to partnershipGrantee barriers to partnership

Most common barrier “Financial limitations within the health department” at

60% (18/30) Least common barrier

“Lack of assistance within my own organization in creating partnership” at 10% (3/30)

Written comments focused on issues with funding and how potential partners want funding to collaborate on specific interventions. Lack of funding also affected program coordination as paid staff is needed for that work.

Top programmatic strengthsTop programmatic strengths

Internal partnerships Good work coordination and support from management

External partnerships Existing external partners strong, collaborations with

faith-based partners, capitalizing on a local AF Chapter partnership

Having a network to deliver interventions and referrals Program staff

Strong level of commitment, expertise, and understanding of arthritis

AppendixAppendix

Additional data from survey not covered in presentation

Knowledge and skillsKnowledge and skills

Most commonly used tools CDC Arthritis Web site: 89% (31/37) used it “A lot” or

“Some” • More experienced AID-funded respondents used the site

more than less experienced AID-funded respondents*• CDC-funded respondents used the site “A lot” or “Some”

regardless of experience CDC data products and sources: 84% (31/37) used it “A

lot” or “Some” • CDC-funded states used CDC data products more than AID-

states• Respondents with 3+ years of experience used CDC data

products more* “less experienced” is defined as having two or less years experience in the respondent’s arthritis program while “more experienced is having three or more years experience

Knowledge and skillsKnowledge and skills

Least used tool AF Step-by-Step Partnership Guide: 43% (16/37) used it

“Not at all”• 27% of respondents did not know this tool existed or where

to find it• Respondents with 2 or less years of experience did not

know this tool existed or where to find it• More respondents from AID-states than CDC-states did not

know this tool existed or where to find it

Respondents' current usage of Respondents' current usage of available resources and toolsavailable resources and tools

Resource/tool

A lot/Some use Not at all used Don't know where to find/existed

% of response

s

N % of response

s

N % of response

s

N

CDC Arthritis Web site 89% 37 11% 37 0% 37CDC data products and sources 84% 37 11% 37 5% 37Cooperative agreement information for state coordinators 68% 37 19% 37 11% 37

Online courses 57% 37 32% 37 11% 37

Media tools 57% 36 24% 36 16% 36Partnership planning information (AF Step-by-Step Partnership Guide) 30% 37 43% 37 27% 37

Partnerships: Program supportPartnerships: Program support

For the most part, respondents were able to access support for the listed programs

Programs “usually able to” access support: CDSMP 94% (30/32) EnhancedFitness 81% (13/16)

Partnerships: Program support Partnerships: Program support suggestionssuggestions

Some respondents did not understand the question Some were unsure if support is meant to come from the

national sponsor of the program, the state chapters, or other organizations with capacity in the programs

Comments that EnhanceFitness and Fit and Strong! have good support but are only offered in a limited geographical area and not statewide like some of the others

Work within state health departmentsWork within state health departments

Responses generally positive “Always true” or "Usually true” that

Respondent able to request epidemiological support in a timely manner: 83% (29/35)

Respondent able to collaborate with other public health programs: 82% (28/34)

Respondent able to access appropriate departments, units, or staff to implement outreach through media: 65% (22/34)• More respondents indicated “Neutral” for this question