Benchmarking Survey Working Group Update

Presented byHeather Guerrero, MA, CCMEPGilead Sciences, Inc.

Karen Dzenko, Boehringer-Ingelheim

Benchmarking Survey Working Group

Beth Page, Lilly

Karen Dzenko, Boehringer-Ingelheim

Co-chairs

Riaz Baxamusa, AstellasKristan Cline, NPS PharmaceuticalsJill Erickson, TakedaHeather Guerrero, Gilead SciencesPatty Jassak, Astellas, (IACE Lead

Elect)Pamela Mason, AstraZenecaApril Pond, TalecrisJanet Moga – GenentechJulia Shklovskaya – TakedaNancy Santilli – Independent Contractor

MembersIACE and ACEHP Leadership

Jason Singer, IACE Lead, Lilly

Christine Amorosi RN MHSA, Division Director - Quality & Innovation

Survey Content

- Department Scope and Budgets- Grant Review and Approval Process

- Nature of Interactions with Providers- Educational Value

- Future Trends

IME Focus Areas Ranked Important to PACME Leadership

Developing the Survey

2009

• 6 organizations represented on Working Group• Identified need to benchmark practices and processes related to Industry funding of

educational grants as a framework for future surveys

Design

• Survey Development (Spring 2009-Spring 2010)• Questions for each focus area were developed, reviewed and revised for clarity and accuracy • Survey was beta-tested by the PACME Leadership Group and refined• Survey consisted of 53 questions – and required approx. 45 minutes to complete

Today

• 12 organizations represented on Working Group• Same survey dissemination process as in 2009

•Survey link was sent to one key individual per organization from the IACE (formerly PACME) membership list•Three reminder notices sent to distribution list•Anonymity guaranteed through use of Zoomerang (now Survey Monkey) platform

What the BWG Has Delivered

• Inaugural year of the Benchmarking Insights in 2013• Almanac publications in 2012 and 2013• Policy and Medicine communication February 2014

• Annual survey since 2010• Two additional surveys focusing on monitoring and

outcomes in 2011

• 8 presentations • Presented at the IACE Summit, Task Force, CME

Congress and CBIPresentations

Surveys

Publications

New Look and Feel to Insights Report

How Does Your Organization Use this Data?

Outcomes

Grant review cycle

Grants

Resource/staffing

Value CME

Budget

RFP/CGA

Monitoring

Process/SOP

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

67% improve organizational process

29% validate organizational process 14% compare against other companies

Free Text Response Answering How Survey Respondents Utilized the Data

2013 Survey

“Organization data was compared against the benchmarking data; improved grant processes to reflect majority of industry.”

“Validates some thinking on areas (ie budgeting, processes).”

“Staffing; evolution of department’s roles and responsibilities.”

“Add monitoring. Increased outcomes expectations. Expand scope of reporting.”“Confirm processes to ensure validation of activities within our organization across the industry.”

“Use of RFPs including information to be included on RFPs and posting options.”“We use the data internally to champion the value of CME message, justify additional resources, and to benchmark processes (like monitoring) within industry. Its a very valuable tool!”

Using the Data

• Insights from Karen and Heather and how their organizations use the data from the survey

• Any input from the attendees about ways they have used the data in their organization?

• Any future topics you would like to see addressed?Discussion

Case Studies

Deeper Dive in the 2014 Survey

Grants review committee

New topic

• Open Payment • Satellite symposia• Single support /multiple support• RFP/CGA• Change of scope • Monitoring• Outcomes

Topics Explored at Greater Depth

For More Information About Survey Participation or a Copy of the

Benchmarking Report

hguerrero@gilead.com

Text to: 281-660-3794

Device companies to be added to survey recipients

Pharma companies to be added to survey recipients

Update contact information

Questions or suggestions