and programs and position relative possibly multiple community inform academic members are academic and Sub-Steps: fit with culture of to other groups. parties in focus stakeholders partners about more willing to clinical Develop protocol patients. groups; multiple results in: important engage in stakeholders Secure IRB Attend to SON / focus groups. matters related to development, collaborate to approval Explore SOM power (1) A prototype P’s and C’s testing, and increase validity, Identify patients institutional dynamics. Bring in the patient-centered relevant to evaluation of new alignment, and Determine policies and experts and site data collection mental health mental health utility of incentives practices (IRB, Attend to leaders with system that screening and screening and mental health Outline logistics merit and attention to better identifies referral. referral practices. screening data “competition” (time, location, promotion, etc.) between power dynamics. inequities and collected in child care, etc.) around team community-based suggest actions. Academic and Academic and community organizations. Treat all sub-steps clinical partners clinical partners settings. science as learning (2) Ideas for how inform patients are more willing and team science. opportunities for to test prototype and community to incorporate partnership and system members about patient and stakeholders. mental health community disparities and feedback into the initiative to their mental collaboratively health screening address them. and referral practices. Cross walk screening data and processes to identify areas of misalignment. Map current mental health referral processes and outcomes. MAIDAN Focus Group Action Evaluation Metrics Action Evaluation Directions: the action that you chose to work on above. Action: 3 I’s: In the shaded section of the grid, write a summary of the information outlined in the 3 I’s columns above.
Sub-Steps: Develop protocol Secure IRB approval Identify patients Determine incentives Outline logistics (time, location, child care, etc.) and programs and fit with culture of patients. Explore institutional policies and practices (IRB, merit and promotion, etc.) around team science and team science. position relative to other groups. Attend to SON / SOM power dynamics. Attend to “competition” between community-based organizations. possibly multiple parties in focus groups; multiple focus groups. Bring in the experts and site leaders with attention to power dynamics. Treat all sub-steps as learning opportunities for partnership and stakeholders. community stakeholders results in: (1) A prototype patient-centered data collection system that better identifies inequities and suggest actions. (2) Ideas for how to test prototype system inform academic partners about important matters related to P’s and C’s relevant to mental health screening and referral. Academic and clinical partners inform patients and community members about mental health disparities and the initiative to collaboratively address them. members are more willing to engage in development, testing, and evaluation of new mental health screening and referral practices. Academic and clinical partners are more willing to incorporate patient and community feedback into their mental health screening and referral practices. academic and clinical stakeholders collaborate to increase validity, alignment, and utility of mental health screening data collected in community settings. Cross walk screening data and processes to identify areas of misalignment. Map current mental health referral processes and outcomes. MAIDAN Focus Group Action Evaluation Metrics Action Evaluation Directions: Action: the action that you chose to work on above. 3 I’s: In the shaded section of the grid, write a summary of the information outlined in the 3 I’s columns above.
afternoonactivity-maidanexample.docx