cohealth client survey 2015 results of the 37% who had a written care plan, 97% found it helpful....
TRANSCRIPT
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 2
Contents
Key messages........................................................................................................................... 3
Executive summary ................................................................................................................. 4
What is “client experience” and why is it important? ........................................................ 7
How was the cohealth client experience survey done? ................................................... 7
What did the survey tell us about our clients’ experiences?............................................. 9
Who participated in the survey? ......................................................................................... 21
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 29
Appendix: List of figures ........................................................................................................ 30
Report prepared by
Yvette Clarke & Catherine Joyce
Policy, Research & Service Innovation Team
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 3
They go
out of
their way
to help
you
I have nothing but
admiration and
praise for the staff
and the situations
they have to work
under
Key messages
The goal of the client survey was to improve understanding of the experiences of
clients accessing cohealth services, in order to identify any areas of service provision
that could be improved or changed.
472 clients completed the telephone-based survey in late 2015. They had attended
more than 15 different programs and services at over 15 cohealth sites. Respondents
were mainly long term cohealth clients with chronic or complex health conditions.
The findings from the survey are resoundingly positive. In all of the key
areas explored – access, continuity, care planning, communication
and information, interpersonal relations, rights, and empowerment –
experiences of cohealth services were strongly positive.
Example highlights include:
o scores of over 90% on: all measures of appropriateness; all items
of the CARE measure of respectfulness and emotional support;
and all care coordination items.
o Of the 51% who had been referred to other cohealth services,
91% had attended the referral.
o Of the 37% who had a written care plan, 97% found it helpful.
The results affirm cohealth as a provider of services that are person-centred,
accessible, integrated, coordinated and responsive.
There are no findings which indicate major areas of concern.
There are a small number of areas which may benefit from further discussion to
explore variability between programs and/or opportunities for development.
The key action arising from the survey is communication
of the positive results both internally and externally.
Any more specific actions arising are to be adopted
by relevant teams and programs as appropriate, and
incorporated into existing monitoring and reporting
mechanisms.
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 4
Executive summary
Client experience refers to the perceptions of clients about the services they receive.
There is increasing interest around the world in measuring client experience of health
services and health systems, due to growing attention to person-centred care as well as
the demonstrated links between client experience and key aspects of health systems
such as accessibility, quality improvement, and performance reporting.
The inaugural cohealth client survey was conducted in October-December 2015. Data
was collected by a specialist survey company (McNair Ingenuity Research) using a
telephone interview method. An opt-in consent process was used, with clients being
called back by McNair on the number provided by them .
A final sample size of 472 clients was achieved. This is sufficient to have confidence in the
accuracy of the results, within a margin of error of approximately 5%. The characteristics
of the sample are broadly consistent with what is known about the profile of cohealth
clients in general. However, the survey results are most useful and valid for particular
groups of clients, including: clients of the dental/oral health, GP/medical, community
mental health, and physiotherapy services; clients of the Collingwood, 2 Geelong Rd,
Niddrie, Braybrook and Kensington sites; and longer term, frequent users of services.
Key findings
Experiences of accessing services were positive, for example:
o 69% waited less than 10 minutes for their appointment on the day
o 92% found reception staff both helpful and polite.
Experiences of respectfulness and emotional support were positive, for example:
o 92% reported that staff were excellent or very good at making them feel
at ease
o 90% reported that staff were excellent or very good at letting them tell
their story.
Experiences of coordination were positive, with very low proportions reporting
being told different things by different staff; or staff not working well together.
Around half had been referred to other cohealth services (51%), and of these,
91% had attended those services.
Almost 2/3 of respondents (64%) reported being aware of the range of cohealth
services. Awareness was high among podiatry (85%) and medical (84%) clients,
and lower among dental/oral health clients (36%).
Experiences of care planning were positive, for example in relation to feeling
positive about future health and wellbeing, and being given an opportunity to
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 5
talk about what they wanted in relation to their care.
Just over one third of clients (37%) were asked whether they would like fami ly,
carer or friends to be involved in the planning of their services. This percentage
was higher for clients of community mental health services (67%) and those with
chronic conditions (43%).
Just over one third of clients (37%) reported receiving a writ ten care plan. This
percentage was higher for clients of community mental health services (71%)
and those with chronic conditions (47%) and was low for clients of dental/oral
health services (9%).
Just over half (58%) reported being told about their rights and responsibilities.
Confidence that private information was safe was very high (90%), while knowing
how to access personal information was low (25%). The proportion reporting that
they knew how to access personal information was higher among clients of
community mental health (45%) and podiatry (45%) services; and lower among
physiotherapy (12%) and dental/oral health (10%) clients.
One third of respondents (32%) reported being aware of opportunities to be
involved in volunteering, an advisory group or as a peer worker. Awareness was
higher among community mental health clients (57%), and lower among
dental/oral health clients (9%).
Just over one in ten respondents (11%; n=51) reported feeling uncomfortable with
their health worker at some time. A total of 18 respondents (4%) indicated that
this discomfort was due to feeling judged or disrespected. A small number of
respondents (5%; n=25) reported feeling that they had been unfairly treated.
A total of 126 open-ended comments were
recorded. Almost half the comments (n=55)
were positive comments about cohealth in
general, or staff in particular.
Survey participants
There were a total of 472 respondents, who had attended more than 15 different
cohealth sites, with Collingwood, 2 Geelong Rd and Niddrie the most frequent.
It has always has been a pleasure
going to cohealth… everyone is very
helpful and friendly
It is the best medical
facility I have ever
experienced in my life.
Anyone whoever goes
there is very fortunate
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 6
Respondents had attended more than 15 different cohealth services, with
dental, medical, and community mental health the most frequent.
Respondents were mainly long term cohealth clients with chronic or complex
health conditions. For example:
o Only 14% were attending cohealth for the first time
o 71% were attending a cohealth service as part of a planned follow up
43% had been accessing cohealth services for 5 years or more
o Nearly 2/3 (61%) has attended cohealth ≥6 times in the last 12 months
o 45% self-reported that they had a long term health condition.
Just over half (57%) of respondents were born in Australia; 2.3% identified as
Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander; and 9.3% identified as an asylum seeker or
refugee.
Four out of five (80%) respondents spoke English fluently or very well. More than 56
different languages were spoken by respondents (they could report more than
one). One in ten respondents (n=48) completed the survey in a language other
than English.
Fewer than one in five respondents (18%) were employed (including 6% who
worked full time); and 37% were on a disability or other pension. Only 8% had no
concession card (Health Care Card, Pensioner Concession card).
Conclusion
The results of this survey provide a resounding affirmation of cohealth as a
provider of services that are person-centred, accessible, integrated, coordinated
and responsive.
There are no findings which indicate major areas of concern. There are a number
of areas which may benefit from further exploration or development, for example
in relation to: awareness of the range of cohealth services; rights and
responsibilities; awareness of participation opportunities; involvement of families
and carers; and use of care plans.
The key action arising from the survey is communication of the positive results
both internally and externally. Any more specific actions arising are to be
adopted by relevant teams and programs as appropriate, and incorporated into
existing monitoring and reporting mechanisms.
Both the findings and the lessons learned in implementing the survey will be used
to inform future iterations of the survey.
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 7
What is “client experience” and why is it important?
Client experience refers to the perceptions of clients about the services they receive. It
includes objective (e.g. waiting time) and subjective (e.g. being treated with respect)
elements.
It is not the same as “client satisfaction”, which focuses on people’s judgments relative to
their expectations. The concept of client experience is aligned with a person-centred
approach which is more focused on gathering the client’s point of view. It is more likely to
lead to actionable results than measures of satisfaction, as it provides a clear indication of
the sources of negative experiences.
There is increasing interest around the world in measuring client experience of health services
and health systems, in part because of growing attention to person-centred care. In
addition, client experience has been demonstrated to be related to key aspects of health
systems such as accessibility, quality improvement, and performance reporting.
For clients, measuring client experience is important because it provides them with a
personal, yet structured opportunity to give feedback on their experiences. It is an indicator
of the respect and value an organisation places on its clients – it wants to hear their
feedback.
For service providers, measuring client experience is important because it provides an
otherwise-unavailable perspective on their services. It is a crucial method of monitoring
quality and identifying areas for improvement.
For cohealth specifically, client feedback mechanisms are required under our various
accreditation obligations. cohealth articulated an explicit commitment to an annual client
survey in its inaugural (2015-2018) Strategic Plan.
The objectives of the cohealth client survey were to:
1. Provide an opportunity for service users to provide feedback that informs quality
improvement
2. Identify the extent to which cohealth’s principles and va lues are reflected in service
user experiences
3. Implement the principles of and collect evidence to track progress against the
Performance Framework and Quality and Client Experience Framework
4. Meet accreditation and funding requirements for consumer feedback mechanisms
and evaluation.
How was the cohealth client experience survey done?
The client survey was overseen by the Policy, Research and Service Innovation Team, and
supported by a Reference Group comprised of staff representatives and community
advisers.
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 8
The content of the survey was developed through a process that included:
Development of a conceptual framework identifying the key domains of interest from
a conceptual point of view, drawing on:
o models of primary health care quality and the social model of health
o cohealth’s values and priorities
o accreditation and funding agreement requirements
Review of existing tools to adopt, adapt and develop a set of questions that
measured the identified domains
Refining and piloting the questions through feedback from staff and community
advisers
Clients who attended cohealth sites or received
cohealth services between 29 October 2015
and 10 December 2015 were invited to take
part in the survey.
An opt-in consent process was used, in which
clients were invited to complete a “consent to
be contacted” form providing a contact name
and phone number to be contacted on.
The survey was conducted by a third-party
specialist research company, using a computer
assisted telephone interview (CATI) method.
Those who consented to be contacted were
called by the company approximately 2 weeks
after their visit. The company provided
interviewers in multiple community languages.
Provision was also made for people to call in if
they did not wish to provide their contact
details.
Is the sample representative of all cohealth clients?
Often, the sample size or response rate is taken as an indicator of the representativeness of a
study sample. It is not possible to calculate a response rate for the client survey because the
number of people invited to take part, and the total number of clients eligible to take part
(the “population”), are unknown.
The final sample size, of 472 clients, is sufficient to have confidence in the accuracy of the
results, within a margin of error of roughly 5%.
One of the best ways to examine the representativeness of a sample is to compare the
characteristics of the sample with the characteristics of the population, to identify any
systematic differences. Unfortunately it was not possible to make such comparisons due to
the lack of available data about the population of cohealth clients. The characteristics of
the survey sample are described in detail in the later section of this report (see page 21).
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 9
Broadly speaking, the profile of survey respondents is consistent with what is known about
cohealth clients in general. However, as the data presented below (see especially Figures 18
and 19), the distribution of respondents by program/service and location indicates some
areas where the sample includes very low numbers. Therefore, in interpreting the results of
the survey, it is important to understand that they provide valid and useful information for
some groups of clients, but less so for others:
Survey provides good information for: Survey provides limited information for:
Clients of the dental/oral health,
GP/medical, community mental
health, and physiotherapy services
Clients of the Collingwood, 2
Geelong Rd, Niddrie, Braybrook and
Kensington sites
Longer term, frequent users of
services
Clients of the Victims Assistance
Program, family services, Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander health,
occupational therapy, and AOD
services
Clients of the Essendon, Laverton,
North Melbourne and Carlton sites
First-time users
What did the survey tell us about our clients’ experiences?
Access
Experiences of accessing services were positive. Just under half (45%) of respondents waited
a week or less for their appointment (Figure 1), and 69% waited less than 10 minutes for their
appointment on the day (Figure 2).
Just over half (52%) had paid for some service at cohealth (Figure 5), with the majority of
these being co-payments for services (Figure 6). Positive responses were reported for access
to buildings and locations (Figure 7).
Experiences of appropriateness were also strongly positive (Figure 8):
90% felt that the appointment took place in a private space
91% found the waiting space safe
90% found the waiting space comfortable
92% found reception staff helpful
92% found reception staff polite
(Note that these figures include “not applicable” responses, so figures excluding the n/a are
even higher – e.g. helpfulness of reception staff is 92% of all responses but 99% of responses
excluding n/a).
Respectfulness & emotional support
Respectfulness and emotional support were measured with the CARE measure. Experiences
of respectfulness and emotional support w ere strongly positive (see Figure 9), with all items on
this measure scoring less than 5% ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ responses. Examples of items include:
92% reported that staff were excellent or very good at making them feel at ease
90% reported that staff were excellent or very good at letting them tell their story.
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 10
Coordination
Experiences of coordination were positive (see Figure 10), for example:
95% reported that they were never or rarely told different things by different staff
94% reported that staff never or rarely did not work well together.
Around half had been referred to other cohealth services (51%), and of these, 91% had
attended those services (Figures 11&12).
Almost 2/3 of respondents (64%) reported being aware of the range of cohealth services.
Awareness was high among podiatry (85%) and medical (84%) clients and lower among
dental/oral health clients (36%).
Care planning
Experiences of care planning were largely positive (see Figure 13), for example 86% agreed
that the health work helped them to feel positive about future health and wellbeing, and 85%
reported that the health worker checked that they understood what was being planned.
(Note that these figures include “not applicable” responses, so figures excluding the n/a are
even higher).
Just over one third of clients (37%) were asked whether they would like family, carer or friends
to be involved in the planning of their services (Figure 14). This percentage was higher for
clients of community mental health services (67%) and those with chronic conditions (43%).
Just over one third of clients (37%) reported receiving a written care plan (Figure 15). This
percentage was higher for clients of community mental health services (71%) and those with
chronic conditions (47%) and was low for clients of dental/oral health services (9%).
Of those who had a written care plan, 97% found it helpful (Figure 16).
Rights and responsibilities
Just over half (58%) reported being told about their rights and responsibilities (Figure 17).
Responses to different aspects were variable, with confidence that private information was
safe very high (90%), while knowing how to access personal information was low (25%).
Participation and engagement
A total of 44 respondents (9%) reported having been involved with cohealth as a volunteer,
advisory group member, peer worker or similar role.
One third of respondents (32%) reported being aware of opportunities to be involved in
volunteering, an advisory group or as a peer worker. Awareness was higher among
community mental health clients (57%), and lower among dental/oral health clients (9%).
Stigma and discrimination
Experiences of stigma and discrimination were explored through asking respondents if they
had ever felt uncomfortable with their health worker at cohealth, and analysing whether this
was due to feeling disrespected or judged, or for other reasons. While just over one in ten
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 11
respondents (11%; n=51) reported feeling uncomfortable with their health worker at some
time, a total of 18 respondents (4%) indicated that this discomfort was due to feeling judged
or disrespected. Other reasons for feeling uncomfortable with their health worker included
feeling that the health worker was inexperienced (n=11; 2%) and that there were trust issues
or the client didn’t feel listened to (n=11; 2%).
Respondents were also asked if they ever felt that they had been treated unfairly at
cohealth. Twenty five respondents felt they had (5%). When asked “why do you think you
were treated unfairly?”, the most common response was that staff were incompetent or
unprofessional (n=8). Six people attributed their unfair treatment to either their medical
or health condition (n=3), or their ethnicity or national origin (n=3).
Open-ended comments
Respondents were invited to make open-ended comments at the conclusion of the
survey. A total of 126 comments were recorded. As indicated in the table below, almost
half the comments (n=55) were positive comments about cohealth in general, or staff in
particular.
Theme Number of
comments
General positive comments 35
Staff attitudes and behaviours – positive comments 20
Waiting times and availability of appointments 16
Staff attitudes and behaviours – negative comments 15
Facilities (waiting areas, parking, etc) 9
Management of appointments 8
Communication and information sharing 4
Service availability or quality 4
Other comments – negative 8
Other comments 7
Comments about waiting times and availability of appointments generally related to waiting
times for appointments being too long. Negative comments about staff attitudes and
behaviours related to lack of compassion o being treated “like a number”. Negative
comments about facilities included complaints about parking at Moonee Ponds, and poor
quality waiting areas. Comments about appointments described experiences of
appointments being rescheduled multiple times or otherwise mismanaged.
They are very nice
and make you feel
special and not a
trouble to them
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 12
Access
Figure 1: How long was the wait between making this appointment & your visit Figure 2: How long did you wait for your appointment?
Figure 3: Do you require an interpreter when accessing services at cohealth? Figure 4: If you required an interpreter, was one organized?
9.1% 8.6%
3.8%
23.1%
26.3%
12.9%
5.9%
10.2%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
39.6%
29.5%
14.6%
6.8%5.1% 4.5%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Less than 5
minutes
5 to 10
minutes
11 to 20
minutes
21 to 30
minutes
More than
30 minutes
Cant
remember
8.3% 91.7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
87.2% 12.8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 13
Figure 5: Have you ever paid for any services at cohealth?
Figure 6: What were those payments for?
51.7% 48.3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
47.0%
6.1%1.9% 2.6%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Co-payment /
contribution for
services
Medication Equipment / aids Other
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 14
Figure 7: Thinking about your appointment at cohealth, how easy was it to:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
a. Get through to someone on the phone
b. Make the appointment
c. Find the location of the service
d. Get to the location of the service
7a. Enter the building
Very easy Fairly easy Not very easy Not at all easy N/A
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 15
Figure 8: Thinking about when you arrived at cohealth on that day, do you feel that:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
b. Reception staff were polite
c. Reception staff were helpful
d. You had a comfortable space to wait
e. You had a safe space to wait
f. Your appointment took place in privatespace
Yes, definitely Yes, to some extent No, not really No, not at all N/A
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 16
Respectfulness & emotional support (CARE Measure)
Figure 9: Thinking about the health worker(s) you saw during your visit on that day, how good were they at:*
*excludes m issing & N/A
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Making you feel at ease
Letting you tell your "story"?
Really listening?
Being interested in you as a whole person?
Fully understanding your concerns?
Showing care and compassion?
Being positive?
Explaining things clearly?
Helping you to take control?
Making a plan of action with you?
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 17
Coordination
Figure 10: Thinking about all your experiences with cohealth over the past 12 months:
Figure 11: Have you ever been referred to other services at cohealth Figure 12: Did you attend those services?
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
a. Told different things health or wellbeing
b. Staff did not seem to work well together
c. Worker did not know personal history
d. Worker did not have access to tests results or case notes
e. You had to repeat information
Never Rarely Some-times Often All the time
51.1% 48.9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Referred Not referred
90.9% 9.1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Attended referral Did not attend referral
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 18
Care Planning
Figure 13: Thinking about when decisions were being made about what services you would receive or what you wanted to achieve…
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
a. Were you given an opportunity to talk about what you wanted to achieve
b. When there were different choices, were you asked what you preferred?
c. Did the health worker listen to your ideas about what you wanted?
d. Did you feel like you were able to make decisions together with the health worker?
e. Did the health worker check that you understood what was being planned?
f. Did the health worker help you feel positive about your future health and wellbeing?
Yes, definitely Yes, to some extent No, not really No, not at all N/A
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 19
Figure 14: Asked whether they would like family, carer or friends to be involved in the planning of their services
Figure 15: Has a written Care Plan Figure 16: Found Written Care Plan Helpful (of those who had one)
36.7% 63.4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
96.6% 3.40%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
36.65% 63.35%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Asked Not Asked
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 20
Rights and responsibilities
Figure 17: Proportion of clients who reported that they were:
58.3%
52.3%
63.8%
59.8%
25.4%
61.4%
90.3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
b. Told about rghts &
responsibilities
c. Told why cohealth
collects private info
d. Told how cohealth
keeps info private
e. Asked consent to
share info
f. Know how to access
personal info
g. Know how to provide
feedback
h. Confident private
info is safe
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 21
Who participated in the survey?
As noted above, a total of 472 people responded to the survey. Responses were received
from people who had attended more than 15 different cohealth sites, with Collingwood, 2
Geelong Rd and Niddrie the most frequent (Figure 18).
Respondents had attended more than 15 different cohealth services, with dental, medical,
and community mental health the most frequent (Figure 19).
Most people (86%) responded to the survey in relation to an appointment for their own health
needs (Figure 20).
Respondents were mainly long term cohealth clients with chronic or complex health
conditions. For example:
Only 14% were attending cohealth for the first time (Figure 21)
71% were attending a cohealth service as part of a planned follow up (Figure 22)
43% had been accessing cohealth services for 5 years or more (Figure 23)
61% has attended cohealth 6 or more times in the last 12 months (Figure 24)
45% self-reported that they had a long term health condition (Figure 26).
The most common chronic conditions that respondents reported being diagnosed with were
depression or anxiety (37%); high blood pressure of hypertension (33%) and
arthritis/rheumatoid arthritis (32%; Figure 27).
With regard to cultural and linguistic diversity:
57% of respondents were born in Australia (Figure 28)
2.3% identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (Figure 30)
9.3% identified as an asylum seeker or refugee (Figure 29)
Four out of five (80%) respondents spoke English fluently or very well (Figure 31). More than 56
different languages were spoken by respondents (they could report more than one). The
most common languages spoken were: Vietnamese (n=32); Italian (26); Arabic (22); Maltese
(10); Mandarin (8); Filipino/Tagalog (7); French (7); Hindi (7); and Cantonese (6).
One in ten respondents (n=48; 10.2%) completed the survey in a language other than English.
Half of these (n=25) were in Vietnamese. The remaining 23 were conducted in Arabic (n=7),
Italian (6), Farsi/Persian (4), Mandarin (4) and Cantonese (2).
Just over half the respondents identified their gender as female (56%; Figure 32); and 78%
identified as heterosexual (Figure 33).
Over one third of respondents (36%) lived in their own home, while 31% were renting, and 15%
were in social/public housing (Figure 34). Fewer than one in five respondents (18%) were
employed (including 6% who worked full time); and 37% were on a disability or other pension
(Figure 35). The vast majority of respondents had a concession card, with only 8% hav ing no
concession card (Figure 37). Respondents lived across a wide range of locations, with the
most common local government areas Maribyrnong (23%), Yarra (19%) and Moonee Valley
(18%; Figure 38).
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 22
Figure 18: Respondents by Site/Location
1
2
2
3
4
8
9
11
18
21
22
25
34
45
50
61
63
93
0.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
1.7%
1.9%
2.3%
3.8%
4.4%
4.7%
5.3%
7.2%
9.5%
10.6%
12.9%
13.3%
19.7%
Essendon
Laverton
Other
North Melbourne
Carlton
Central City
Joslin
Not at a cohealth site
Fitzroy
Moonee Ponds
Hoppers Crossing/Werribee
Nicholson St/Healthworks
72 Paisley Street
Kensington
Braybrook
Niddrie
2 Geelong Road
Collingwood
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 23
Figure 19: Respondents by Service/Program
1
1
2
3
6
6
13
15
16
33
37
44
49
114
132
0.2%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
1.3%
1.3%
2.8%
3.2%
3.4%
7.0%
7.8%
9.3%
10.4%
24.2%
28.0%
Victims Assistance Program
Family Services
ATSI health
Occupational Therapy
Alcohol and Other Drugs Services
Dietetics/Dietitian
Case work/Counselling
Other/Not specified
Youth and Child Services
Podiatry
Nursing*
Physiotherapy
Community Mental Health
GP/Doctor
Dental
* Nursing includes:- Diabetes Nurse Educator- Mental health nurse
- Refugee health nurse- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health nurse- Women’s health nurse- Nursing clinic
- Other nurses
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 24
Figure 20: Who was the appointment for?
Figure 21: Was this the first time you accessed services at cohealth? Figure 22: Was the appointment part of a planned follow up or monitoring?
Figure 23: How long have you been accessing services at cohealth? Figure 24: How many times have you accessed cohealth over the past year?
2.1%
11.7%
86.2%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%
Someone else
Dependent child
Self
14.2% 85.8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
70.6% 29.4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes No
23.2%
34.3%
17.0%
25.4%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Less than a year 1-4 years 5-10 years More than 10
years
4.2%
34.3%
17.0%
44.4%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Only this visit 2-5 times 6-10 times More than 10
times
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 25
Figure 25: Health Status Figure 26: Long term physical or mental health condition, impairment or disability
Figure 27: Chronic health conditions
15.3%
24.8%
28.4%
20.3%
11.2%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Excellent Very good Good Fair Poor
45.3%
53.4%
1.3%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Yes No Prefer not to say
36.9%32.8% 31.8%
18.6%16.3% 14.6%
10.0%6.4% 4.7%
2.5% 1.5%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Depression or
anxiety
High blood
pressure or
hypertension
Arthritis or
rheumatoid
arthritis
Diabetes Heart disease Other mental
health
condition
Other chronic
health
problems
Chronic pain Asthma /
Respiratory
problems
Prefer not to
say
Cancer
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 26
Figure 28: Born in Australia Figure 29: Asylum Seeker or Refugee
Figure 30: Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Figure 31: English Fluency
57.0%
43.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Yes No
9.3%
32.2%
58.5%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Yes No Prefer not to
say/Missing
2.3%
97.3%
0.4%0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Aboriginal and/or
Torres Strait Islander
Neither Prefer not to say
67.4%
12.5% 10.6%6.6%
3.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Fluent Very well Well Not very well Not at all
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 27
Figure 32: Gender Identity Figure 33: Sexual Identity
Figure 34: Housing status Figure 35: Employment status
56.4%
43.4%
0.2%0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Female Male Something else
78.0%
1.5% 1.3%8.5%
0.2%10.6%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
36.2%
30.9%
2.5%
14.6%
0.8%4.2%
10.6%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
6.1% 8.3%3.4% 3.6%
28.2%
37.5%
2.3%
10.6%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 28
Figure 36: Age Figure 37: Concession cards
Figure 38: LGAs (from postcode)
9.8%
0.9%2.5%
10.6%12.5%
14.8%17.2% 17.8%
14.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
< 12 12-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 +
36.40%
52.50%
8.47%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
Health Care Card Pensioner Concession
Card
No concession card
22.9%
18.9% 17.8%
10.0%
5.3% 5.1% 4.9%3.4% 3.0%
1.1% 1.9%
5.7%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
Maribyrnong Yarra Moonee
Valley
Brimbank Hobsons Bay Wyndham Melbourne Hume Darebin Whittlesea Moreland Other
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 29
Conclusion
The findings of this survey provide a resounding affirmation of cohealth as a provider of
services that are person-centred, accessible, integrated, coordinated and responsive.
There are no findings which indicate major areas of concern. There are a number of areas
which may benefit from further exploration or development, for example:
Relatively low awareness of the range of services offered by cohealth, and
considerable variability between programs in this regard
Relatively low rates of being advised of rights and responsibilities, particular ly in relation
to how to access personal information, and again with considerable variability
between programs
Relatively low awareness of opportunities for engagement/ involvement with cohealth
other than as a service user (volunteer, community adviser etc)
Whether increases are warranted in rates of asking clients about involvement of
families or carers in their care
Whether increases are warranted in proportions of clients who have a written care
plan
The key action arising from the survey is communication of the positive results both internally
and externally. Any more specific actions arising, as identified through discussion of the results
with staff and community, will be adopted by relevant teams and programs as appropriate.
These will be incorporated into existing monitoring and reporting mechanisms, such as the
Quality Work Plan, as well as internal operational plans.
The results provide an important baseline for ongoing monitoring of cohealth quality and
performance. The results, as well as the learnings from the implementation of the 2015 survey,
will be used to inform future surveys.
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 30
Appendix: List of figures
Figure 1: How long was the wait between making this appointment & your visit ..................... 12
Figure 2: How long did you wait for your appointment? .......................................................... 12
Figure 3: Do you require an interpreter when accessing services at cohealth? ....................... 12
Figure 4: If you required an interpreter, was one organized? ................................................... 12
Figure 5: Have you ever paid for any services at cohealth?..................................................... 13
Figure 6: What were those payments for? ................................................................................. 13
Figure 7: Thinking about your appointment at cohealth, how easy was it to: [access]............ 14
Figure 8: Thinking about when you arrived at cohealth on that day, do you feel that:
[privacy, safety and com fort] .................................................................................. 15
Figure 9: Thinking about the health worker(s) you saw during your visit on that day, how
good were they at: [respectfulness and emotional support (CARE)] ....................... 16
Figure 10: Thinking about all your experiences with cohealth over the past 12 months:
[coordination] ........................................................................................................... 17
Figure 11: Have you ever been referred to other services at cohealth? .................................. 17
Figure 12: Did you attend those services? ................................................................................. 17
Figure 13: Thinking about when decisions were being made about what services you would
receive or what you wanted to achieve [care planning]… .................................... 18
Figure 14: Asked whether they would like family, carer or friends to be involved in the
planning of their services ......................................................................................... 19
Figure 15: Has a written Care Plan............................................................................................. 19
Figure 16: Found Written Care Plan Helpful (of those who had one) ........................................ 19
Figure 17: Proportion of clients who reported that they were: [informed about rights
and responsibilities] ................................................................................................... 20
Figure 18: Respondents by Site/Location .................................................................................. 22
Figure 19: Respondents by Service/Program............................................................................. 23
Figure 20: Who was the appointment for? ............................................................................... 24
Figure 21: Was this the first time you accessed services at cohealth? ..................................... 24
Figure 22: Was the appointment part of a planned follow up or monitoring? ......................... 24
cohealth Client Survey 2015 Results 31
Figure 23: How long have you been accessing services at cohealth? .................................... 24
Figure 24: How many times have you accessed cohealth over the past year? ...................... 24
Figure 25: Health Status ............................................................................................................. 25
Figure 26: Long term physical or mental health condition, impairment or disability ................. 25
Figure 27: Chronic health conditions ......................................................................................... 25
Figure 28: Born in Australia ......................................................................................................... 26
Figure 29: Asylum Seeker or Refugee ........................................................................................ 26
Figure 30: Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.............................................................................. 26
Figure 31: English Fluency .......................................................................................................... 26
Figure 32: Gender Identity ......................................................................................................... 27
Figure 33: Sexual Identity ........................................................................................................... 27
Figure 34: Housing status............................................................................................................ 27
Figure 35: Employment status .................................................................................................... 27
Figure 36: Age............................................................................................................................ 28
Figure 37: Concession cards ...................................................................................................... 28
Figure 38: LGAs (from postcode) ............................................................................................... 28