AFISE Baylor Romania – Planning and Measuring Quality

Baylor Romania – Planning and Measuring Quality for Infectious Diseases and Community Services

Background

Quality indicators are as important as the quantitative ones , when delivering social / medical services and working with patients . The quality indicators are relevant for identifying potential quality concerns , emphasizing areas that need further study and investigation , and track changes over time .

Quality measurement of Baylor Romania ’ s services is a constant focus for the M & E department , since we are aware that the quality of our services has a direct influence over our patients ’ health and indirectly over the community ’ s health on the long term .

The interest for measuring quality is relevant worldwide , and social scientists have developed various theoretical frameworks . One such model that presents social quality has been developed by the “ European Foundation on Social Quality ” as a result of an international project . The resulting document “ Indicators of Social Quality : Outcomes of the European Scientific Network ” was written by Laurent J . G . van der Maesen and Alan C . Walker .

Objective

To provide a guideline for evaluating Baylor Romania ’ s services from a quality point of view .

Methods

In order to exemplify the quality indicators used by Baylor Romania we ’ ve analyzed how the psychosocial department is functioning , since the situation is similar for other departments within the organization .

The psychosocial department was analyzed from two perspectives : « internal procedures aiming to ensure alignment with the mission statement – these are regulations and standards that were either developed by the organization or that were already established at the national level . The internal procedures are ensuring a common approach in providing direct services by all personnel involved « quality indicators set for HIV care – these are basically social indicators that intertwine theoretical and practical approaches used in HIV psychosocial care

In order to describe the quality indicators , we ’ ve adapted to our organization the framework presented in the “ Indicators of Social Quality : Outcomes of the European Scientific Network ”. This is a model of social quality developed by the “ European Foundation on Social Quality ” as a result of an international project . The document ’ s theoretical approach to social quality was used to analyze all the documents , procedures and indicators used and established for the psychosocial department in order to identify their quality relates dimensions .

According to this model there are four basic areas that determine the social quality of one ’ s life ; all these areas highlight the connection between the person and the society : « Social empowerment – people ’ s capability to interact and to use their abilities in social relations ; « Social inclusion – the accessibility and integration into different institutions , social relations , etc ; « Socio-economic security – is a measurement of access to resources over time ; « Social cohesion – are necessary collective accepted values and norms that enable community building .

Results

In accordance with the model proposed by the guiding document the social quality was defined as the extent to which Baylor Romania ’ s services succeed to support HIV infected and affected people in taking informed decisions concerning their health , social and economic life as well as enhancing their individual potential , by addressing their needs through an individualized approach .

Two quality care dimensions were identified based on the analysis of Baylor Romania ’ s psychosocial department : quality indicators , which involve measurements and data collection ( therefore a more “ static ” dimension ) and procedures which ensure constant high quality interventions within the organization ( the “ dynamic ” dimension ).

The quality indicators which were identified followed the following categories : social empowerment , defined as health empowerment , social inclusion ( labor market , services , citizenship rights , etc ), social economic security ( financial resources , housing and environment ), social cohesion ( responsibility ). The final goal of all the activities reflected in these indicators is to have informed and skilled beneficiaries , able to deal with the various tasks and challenges they face in their social network , while keeping their independence and ability to exert their rights and responsibilities .

The procedures analyzed were part of the common approach towards beneficiaries from all personnel involved in providing direct services , offering guidance , structuring the intervention and representing the link between the vision of the organization , the theoretical psychosocial approach and the specialist .

Below some examples are listed :

« Annually updated psychosocial standards , clear and flexible distribution of responsibilities on each case for every team member ; « Weekly multidisciplinary team meetings for case-studies discussions ; « Constant development of instruments and tools in order to cover the majority of social situations requesting interventions , electronic psychosocial data base ; « Regular update of the information delivered through printed materials or during counseling in order to integrate new discoveries from HIV area or new information requested by beneficiaries ; « Services delivery contracts used for all beneficiaries accessing Baylor services .

Conclusions

Author : Mihale Stefania , programs director - Baylor Romania

Both dimensions , the static and the dynamic ones , are necessary , allowing the double approach to quality from both the results / impact and procedural point of view . They sustain one another . How this is actually implemented depends on the organization ’ s culture , vision , local environment and social background . The focus on quality requires time to be established and it is a necessary step in the development of the organization and its culture .

Bibliography : “ Indicators of Social Quality : Outcomes of the European Scientific Network ” by Laurent J . G . van der Maesen and Alan C . Walker