| Q1 |
Why has the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma been changed before the six month progress report due in Feb 2006?
|
| |
A review of the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma has recently been completed, including a 3 month trial of the reporting element of the pro forma by members of the Planning and Reporting Working Group. Survey and trial respondents provided feedback on the strengths and limitations of the pro forma and suggested some changes to the pro forma in the short and long term.
Based on these outcomes and suggestions, several short term changes to the pro forma were made to assist users in the six month reporting process, other longer term changes will be considered after the six month progress report.
|
| Q2 |
Why are some of the National Performance Indicators not required to be reported against in this six-month progress report due on 15 Feb 2006?
|
| |
The reporting requirements for all indicators were reviewed as a result of feedback from the Divisions network. Reducing reporting requirements were considered appropriate where it was possible to reduce any reporting burden on GPs or where the nature of the indicator meant a 6 month report would not be meaningful. This review resulted in the 6 month report requirement being removed for indicators N_RES 1.3, N_RES 4.1, N_INT 1.2, N_INT 2.1, N_INT 2.2, N_DIA 1.3, N_MNH 1.3, N_MNH 4.1, N_ASM 1.3, and N_ASM 2.2. The required reporting for each National Performance Indicator is included within the technical details (please note associated pages in the Future Directions Toolkit were updated and disseminated on 17 November 2005).
In addition, as the department has experienced unavoidable delays in the provision of the standard survey questions and mental health and diabetes population estimates, these resources are unable to be provided within the timeframe previously advised. As this affects the ability of the Divisions network to report against a subset of the National Performance Indicators in the Six-Month Progress Report due on 15 February 2006, flexible reporting requirements were established in relation to the affected subset. A table has been disseminated to the Divisions network that acts as a guide to Divisions/SBOs in determining which National Performance Indicators are able to be reported against in the Six-Month Progress Report.
For more information regarding data resource availability and the ability of Divisions to report against National Performance Indicators please refer to Table 2 in the following document:
 Data package to assist Divisions with performance indicator reporting for February 2006 [PDF:149KB]
|
| Q3 |
Can I cross reference in the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma?
|
| |
A Divisions' work and outcomes may logically belong in more than one priority area, domain or objective. It will be important to capture this information in any national overview of Division's activities so the Planning and Reporting pro forma has been amended by the addition of a box in which Divisions may cross reference their work to other sections within the document.
|
| Q4 |
How do I report against the National Performance Indicators?
|
| |
Standard text format (qualitative indicators) or tables (quantitative
indicators) have been developed for all of the indicators. This information is outlined within the technical details that support each National Performance Indicators and are incorporated in the results section of the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma.
|
| Q5 |
Where in the pro forma do I write my qualitative results to the indicators - in the result boxes or as attachments?
|
| |
Where possible, all qualitative results should be recorded in the
allocated result boxes "results for the reporting period" throughout the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma rather than separate attachments. Result tables are provided for quantitative results.
|
| Q6 |
What do I do if I cannot report against an indicator that I included in my Annual Plan?
|
| |
Divisions are encouraged to report against all indicators included in their 2005-06 Annual Plan. Where a Division is not able to report against a nominated indicator, Divisions should provide information as to why this is not possible. There is capacity within the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma for Divisions to report any exceptional or extenuating circumstances. Divisions should also discuss this with their State and Territory Office of the Department.
|
| Q7 |
What is the difference between the sections "explanatory text" and "reflection on work towards all objectives within this domain" within the pro forma? Are both sections compulsory?
|
| |
The "explanatory text" is an area of the pro forma that Divisions and SBOs can use to report any contextual, exceptional or extenuating circumstances relating to the performance results. It is not compulsory and should be used as appropriate.
The section "reflection on work towards all objectives within this domain" is compulsory and is intended for Divisions and SBOs to record their experiences and conclusions for their own self reflection processes as well as to share for the benefit of the Network and policy consideration.
|
| Q8 |
Will points be allocated at the six-month progress report?
|
| |
Points are not considered until the 12 Month Report. Performance information from the 2005-06 Progress Report will be used together with expert opinion and consultation with the Divisions network, to assist in the development of the bonus points and targets to be established for 2006-07.
|
| Q9 |
Will partial points be allocated against any National Performance Indicators?
|
| |
Partial points will not be allocated against the National Performance Indicators. Divisions and SBOs will receive either the total points available for reporting against that indicator or if insufficient information is provided, points will not be allocated.
|
| Q10 |
Some of the performance indicators require information about one or more significant achievements at the 6 month progress report. What do I report if there hasn't been a significant achievement completed at the time of the 6 month report?
|
| |
If the planned significant achievement has not been completed at the time of the 6 month progress report, Divisions network members would be expected to provide information on the progress made towards achievement(s). The total number of required significant achievements for each National Performance Indicator listed in the technical details is an annual requirement.
|
| Q11 |
Do I report against every National Performance Indicator?
|
| |
Divisions should report against all the compulsory National Performance Indicators and the optional National Performance Indicators they elected to include in their Annual Plans.
With specific reference to the 15 February 2005 Progress Report, the department has experienced unavoidable delays in the provision of the standard survey questions and mental health and diabetes population estimates and these resources are unable to be provided within the timeframe previously advised. As this affects the ability of the Divisions network to report against a subset of the National Performance Indicators in the Six-Month Progress Report due on 15 February 2006, flexible reporting requirements were established in relation to the affected subset. A table has been disseminated to the Divisions network that acts as a guide to Divisions/SBOs in determining which National Performance Indicators are able to be reported against in the Six-Month Progress Report.
|
| Q12 |
The technical details for N_IMM 2.3 currently states that the numerator data can be accessed through an ACIR report. However, this data is not able to be accessed through ACIR so how do I obtain this information?
|
| |
The information in the technical details relating to N_IMM 2.3 is incorrect. As the information is not available through the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (ACIR), a standard survey question has been developed to assist Divisions to report against this indicator. This standard survey question will be provided to Divisions in January 2006 together with the standard survey questions relating to diabetes, mental health, asthma, residential aged care and GP/hospital integration. The Future Directions Toolkit and the Performance Indicator booklet will be updated in 2006 and this information will be corrected at that time.
|
| Q13 |
Can I report all the requirements for the GP Aged Care Panels Program
in the National Planning and Reporting Pro forma or should I include an
attachment that considers the additional requirements listed on page 26 of
the Handbook listed as:
- a comprehensive report on progress made toward achieving program
outcomes, outputs and performance indicators
- identification of barriers experienced and future challenges expected
- actions taken or proposed to overcome those barriers and challenges
- a succinct executive summary
- operational information
- a description of outcomes, achievements and activities against each of the performance indicators
|
| |
The revised proformas (sent to all Divisions and SBOs by PHC RIS on 20
December 2006) are sufficient to meet all the reporting requirements for GP
aged care panels. The only exception to this is the Standard Data Items
which have been provided to you separately by your state/territory office
of the department in the GP Aged Care Panels Standard Data Item Form.
The following information explains how the reporting requirements listed in
the Handbook are met in the revised pro forma:
- a comprehensive report on progress made toward achieving program
outcomes, outputs and performance indicators - is represented by the entire
section of the report for Priority Area 3: Access.
- identification of barriers experienced and future challenges expected -
to be included in the 'notable challenges and key contributing factors'
cell within the Reflections Section
- actions taken or proposed to overcome those barriers and challenges - to
be included in the section 'What did the Divisions learn from the strategic
approaches used' in the Reflections Section
- a succinct executive summary - will form part of the overall new
executive summary section
- operational information - will form part of the responses within the
program indicators
- a description of outcomes, achievements and activities against each of
the performance indicators - is represented by the entire section of the
report for Priority Area 3: Access.
|
| Q14 |
We were recently notified of changes to the Aged Care GP Panel program indicators. Based on these changes, what do we now need to report on for our 6 monthly report due in February 2006? |
| |
Based on feedback from the Divisions network and the Department's
commitment to reviewing program level indicators, the Aged Care Panel performance indicators have been reduced to streamline reporting for Divisions as well as to reduce any duplication between these indicators and the National Quality and Performance System performance indicators. The recent contract variation (sent to Divisions through State/Territory Offices) articulated the changes to the Aged Care GP Panels performance indicators. Divisions will now only need to report against the following Aged Care GP Panel indicators (in addition to the compulsory NQPS performance indicators):
Objective One - Improved access to appropriate medical care for all aged care residents
Performance indicator:
1. Aged Care Homes advise that access to GP services has improved.
(Source: 2004 Aged Care Homes Survey - Questions 1 & 2)
Objective Two - Increased participation of GPs in aged care initiatives aimed at improving quality of care
Performance indicators:
2. Proportion of Aged Care Homes that have general practitioner
involvement in their quality improvement activities
(Source: 2004 Aged Care Homes Survey - Question 6 & Descriptive comment from Division required)
3. Aged Care Homes satisfaction with the outcomes of general practitioner
involvement in their quality improvement activities
(Source: 2004 Aged Care Homes Survey - Questions 7 & 8)
Objective Three - GPs and Divisions working more effectively with Aged Care Homes
Performance indicators
4. Aged Care Homes advise that Aged Care GP Panel is undertaking work to
address key concerns
(Source: Divisional Reporting on this one not required - this question was not included in the 2004 Aged Care Homes Survey but has been included for the next Aged Care Homes survey to be conducted in early 2006)
5. Key priorities to address needs within the Divisions boundaries have
been identified
(Source: Descriptive comment from Division required)
6. Aged Care GP Panel is operational
(Source: Descriptive comment from Division required)
7. Transparent and accountable processes for the Aged Care GP Panels
member selection and appointment is established and maintained
(Source: Descriptive comment from Division required)
8. The Aged Care GP Panel model is built on and amended in light of the
Initiative development. (Source: Descriptive comment from Division required)
With the aim to ensure a smooth transition for Divisions to the reduced set of Panels PIs, the Planning and Reporting document was amended and now includes the reduced set of performance indicators that Divisions have to report against for the Aged Care GP Panels initiative. The updated planning and reporting document was recently sent to Divisions by PHC RIS.
The only other report Divisions are required to submit under the Panels initiative is the Standard Data Item form (provided 6 monthly).
|
| Q15 |
A number of the Aged Care GP Panels indicators (noted above) require
information from the Aged Care Homes Survey. How do we report against these indicators? |
| |
At this time, Divisions should use the information from the 2004 Aged
Care Homes Survey publication provided to the Divisions network in August/September 2005. If specific information has not been provided for your Division (due to the small size of some Divisions), please use the appropriate state average.
The Department is currently in the process of engaging an independent consultant to undertake the Aged Care Homes Survey for the period 1 July
2004 to 31 December 2005. The results from this survey will be available for Divisions for the 12 month reporting process. |
| Q16 |
The reporting table provided for N_IMM 3.1 requires Divisions to supply the immunisation data for each practice in the Division. Is it suitable to provide just the Division average? If I provide individual practice data, how do I use this table for a large number of practices when it is designed for input for only 6 practices (though further columns could be added to fit about 10 practices)? |
| |
In order to report against this indicator, Divisions must provide the
data for each practice. This information is available from ACIR (many Divisions already receive this data) and an information sheet on how to apply for this information through ACIR has been provided to all Divisions.
In order to make the table more user friendly for those Divisions with large numbers of practices, an alternative format has been developed and can be downloaded from the planning and reporting support pages on the
PHCRIS website (http://www.phcris.org.au/divisions/reporting). If your
Division has more than 10 practices to report on then this alternative format will be more suitable.
Download Table N_IMM
3.1 Alternate format.doc 236Kb. |
| Q17 |
Why has the Department supplied data with data reference periods that do not align to the reporting period for the 6 month report? |
| |
Due to the time frames associated with the provision of data to the Divisions network, the Department was not able to source data that aligned with the reporting period for the 6 month report. This was in part due to the time lags associated with the release and processing of data from Medicare Australia, and the need to develop and review the data package prior to its release to the Divisions network. The Department will aim to improve the alignment of the data reference periods with the Divisions network reporting period for the 12 month report. |
| Q18 |
Are Divisions expected to report at Levels 1 and 2 if they are also reporting at levels 3 and 4? |
| |
Yes, Divisions could be reporting at all levels in any domain. As there are relatively few indicators at levels 3 and 4, they cannot act as proxy indicators for the effectiveness of all the organisational structures and processes of Levels 1 and 2 that is necessary information for Divisions and also needs to be assessed in 2005-08. Over time and with the growth of the capacity of the network, the need for some of the indicators at levels 1 and 2 will be replaced with an emphasis on more indicators at levels 3 and 4.
Indicators across the levels that must be responded to are marked 'compulsory'. |
| Q19 |
If a Division implements a program that enables them to report at Levels 3 and 4 but not at Levels 1 and 2 what do they do? |
| |
If the indicators at Levels 1 and 2 are compulsory, the Division would need to make some changes to the program, to allow them to report on these indicators. If the indicators at the lower levels are not compulsory, reporting on them is at the discretion of the Division. There is capacity within the new planning and reporting proforma for Divisions to report any exceptional or extenuating circumstances. |
| Q20 |
Will growth and progress on an issue be seen as significant progress? |
| |
Yes, progress will be assessed on an issue-by-issue basis. In some areas maintenance of the status quo will be seen as significant, eg. maintenance of smoking targets among patients on practice register/recall/reminder systems with asthma. |
| Q21 |
The documentation does not clearly identify how Divisions add their 'local priorities' and projects. How is this to work? |
| |
The Department wants information on all divisional activities funded from core grants. Local activities should be reported against the most relevant of the nine priority areas, eg. if a Division receives funding from a state government for a youth mental health program it should be reported in the Chronic Disease Management NPA, mental health domain. |
| Q22 |
A key component of Divisional work is practice support. Which priority area should this be reported under in the new template? |
| |
Most practice support activities will fit under the General Practice Support National Priority Area (NPA). However, some practice support activities may fit better in another NPA, eg. activities specifically relating to the recruitment and retention of an appropriate primary care workforce would fit under the Workforce Support NPA. |
| Q23 |
How do Divisions capture all the work completed with key stakeholders, such as relationships with other sectors (disabilities, state health etc)? |
| |
Activities involving collaboration with key stakeholders should be reported under the National Priority Area (NPA) most relevant to the activity involved. For example, activities involving collaboration or integration with hospitals should be reported under the Integration NPA; activities involving working with state governments to improve recruitment of doctors in rural areas should be reported under the Workforce NPA. Collaborations with key stakeholders also need to be reported under the governance indicator EEE (Div) 1.2). Your SBO or ADGP can provide guidance where required. |
| Q24 |
On page D2:16, is it compulsory to report against the Level 1 and Level 2 indicators considering the Level 3 indicator is compulsory? |
| |
Divisions must report on all compulsory indicators (marked 'compulsory'). This means N_RES 1.1, N_RES 1.2 and N_RES 3.1 are compulsory. N_RES 1.3, N_RES 2.1, N_RES 2.2 and N_RES 4.1 are not compulsory and reporting on them is at the discretion of the Division. |
| Q25 |
Pages D2:18, D2:19, D2:20 list National Performance Indicators (the 14 indicators are currently included in Divisions contracts under the Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative). These pages also have columns for indicator level and points. Are Divisions expected to complete these tables? Are they compulsory? |
| |
Indicators on Pages D2:18, 19, 20 are performance indicators under the Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative. They are not part of the initial set of core National Performance Indicators for Divisions of General Practice. (National indicators are denoted by the N_ prior to the indicator number). All Divisions receive Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative funding and as such, all Divisions are required to report against the Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative performance indicators. These indicators do not currently have levels and points and the columns relating to points and levels can be left blank. |
| Q26 |
If a Division feels that all their aged care strategies and activities relate to both the national objectives for the core Aged Care funding program and the Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative, can they just put all of the strategies and activities in the first box and write "see above" in the others? |
| |
Yes. In response to feedback the Department acknowledges a number of activities/strategies can be designed to achieve more than one objective and this approach is in keeping with streamlined reporting. |
| Q27 |
Why is the structure of the aged care tables different from the MAHS tables (which is a compulsory section for those Divisions receiving MAHS funding)? |
| |
The structure of the Access RACF tables is different from the MAHS tables because although MAHS is an additionally funded national program with national objectives, it does not currently have national performance indicators that can be included in the tables. Divisions will use local performance indicators. The Residential Aged Care Domain uses the national indicators already collected under the Strengthening Medicare Aged Care GP Panels Initiative. |
| Q28 |
How do I update my 2005-06 12 Month Report result tables for the technical details update of Aug 2006? |
| |
PHC RIS has produced instructions on how to update your 2005-06 12 Month Report result tables providing written and visual instructions. These instructions were a follow up to the letter regarding “Update on Planning and Reporting for the Divisions of General Practice Program”. |
| Q29 |
Are there any other 'Tips' for Divisions/SBOs in completing their Reports? |
| |
Yes, see the 'Tip Sheet' for Divisions/SBOs produced by DoHA. This can be found on the Downloads page of the Planning & Reporting Support pages. |
| Q30 |
Are there any examples of how to report against the Indicators and Reflections? |
| |
The 'worked examples' page of the Planning & Reporting Support pages shows examples of how to report against some of the Indicators and Reflection tables. |
| Q31 |
Is there a glossary where I can look up a definition of a particular word that I am unsure about? |
| |
Yes, there are several sources.
- The Glossary of Terms produced by DoHA that can be found on the Downloads page of the Planning & Reporting Support pages.
- More relevant to the Annual Survey of Divisions is the DIOS Definitions & Acronyms and
- for more general acronyms see the PHC RIS acronym list.
|
| Q |
Where can I go for help?
|
| |
The following resources are available to assist in the six month
progress reporting process:
- The PHCRIS Assist Service (formerly PHCRIS Help desk) will be available to
respond to queries on the functionality and amendments of the pro forma
on 1800 025 882, assist@phcris.org.au or the "ask a question" on-line form.
- Web links against the national performance indicators in the planning
and reporting pro forma are being established. These link to the
relevant performance indicator technical specifications, relevant
guidelines and where available, worked examples of reporting against
that indicator. You can view this same information by starting at the Indicators list.
- Support is also available from ADGP, SBOs and state and territory
offices of the department.
|
If your question has not been answered by the above information please use the contact information on the 'Further Queries' page to ask your question.
