Slide 1

Report
What’s New with Beacon?
AACN National Teaching Institute
May 2010
Washington D.C.
Today’s Topics
• Brief history of Beacon
• Beacon changes
– Criteria
– Review process
– Scoring
• New resources coming soon
A Little History
• Established in 2003
• 42 questions in 6 categories
• Available for Adult Critical Care,
Progressive Care and Pediatric Critical
Care only
Beacon Award Program Goals
• Recognition of unit level excellence in
practice and patient outcomes
• Answer the question “What does an
excellent critical care unit look like?”
• Share best practices from excellent units
Success to date
• 315 units recognized since 2003
• 127 units recognized this year
• 52 units multiple winners
What We’ve Learned
• Beacon award aligns with other nationally
recognized quality programs
– Baldrige
– Magnet
– National Quality Forum (NQF)
– AACN Standards for Achieving and
Sustaining a Healthy Work Environment
Alignment of Beacon Award for Excellence Criteria with other National Recognition Programs
Beacon Award for
Excellence
Leadership Structures &
Systems
Appropriate Staffing & Staff
Engagement
Effective Communication
Knowledge
Management & Best
Practices
Evidence-based Practice &
Processes
Patient Outcomes
Baldrige National
Quality Program
Leadership
Workforce Focus
Measurement, Analysis &
Knowledge
Management
Process Management
Focus on Patients, other
customers &
markets
Healthy Work
Environment
Authentic Leadership
Meaningful Recognition
Appropriate Staffing
Effective Decision Making
True Collaboration
Skilled Communication
Magnet Recognition
Program
Structural Empowerment
Transformational Leadership
National Quality Forum
Safe Practice: Leadership
Structures &
Systems
SP: Identification &
Mitigation of Risks &
Hazards
Exemplary Professional
Practice
New Knowledge, innovations
and improvements
SP II: ICU (intensivists)
certified
SP: Direct Caregivers (NonNursing Staffing)
SP 9: Nursing Workforce
(Staffing)
SP 8: Care of the Caregiver
Safe Practice: Teamwork
Training & Skill
Building (to reduce
preventable harm to
patients)
SP 14: Labeling of Diagnostic
Studies (Red Lab Dx)
SP 13: Order Read-Back &
Abbreviations
SP 5: Informed Consent
SP 16: Computerized Prescriber
Order Entry (technology
information sharing)
SP: Disclosure (Following
serious unanticipated
outcomes)
SP 15: Discharge Systems
(hand offs)
SP 12: Patient Care Information
(CPDE accessible)
Safe Practice: Culture
Measurement
Feedback &
Intervention
Empirical outcomes
SP 22: Surgical Site infection
prevention
SP 21 Central Line
Associated Blood
Stream Infection
Prevention
SP 19 Hand hygiene
SP: Care of the Ventilated
Patient (DVT, PUD,
Decub, VAP, VT)
SP: Medication
Reconciliation
SP 29: Anticoagulation
therapy (peds/neo)
SP: Life-sustaining treatment
SP 24: Multi-resistant
organism prevention
(MORO)
SP 33: Falls prevention
SP 32: Organ Donation
SP 32: Glycemic Control
SP 27: Pressure Ulcer
Prevention
SP 28: Venous
Thromboembolism
Prevention
SP 25: Catheter-Associated
Urinary tract
Infection prevention
What We’ve Learned
• Blind review didn’t provide sufficient
context for evaluation
• Review cycle too long
• We need to be able to share best
practices among units
What’s the Same?
• Web-based application and feedback
process
• 360 degree evaluation of your unit
• Independent review by trained reviewers
• Tools and resources available on the
Beacon website
What’s Different
• Award extended from 1 to 3 years
• Eliminated steps in the process – no more
requests for additional information
• Focus on “how”
What’s Different
• Evaluation changed from “meets, does not
meet, exceeds” to numerical scoring to
allow units to measure improvement over
time
• Implemented 3 levels of award – bronze,
silver and gold
What’s Better
• Added unit profile to fully describe the
relationships and structure of your unit
• Expanded criteria to allow any unit where
patients receive their principle nursing care after
admission to apply
• Addition of Executive Summary to feedback
2010 Beacon Criteria
Beacon Categories
2010
2003
Unit Profile
Leadership Structures &
Systems
Leadership/Organizational
Ethics
Appropriate Staffing and Staff
Engagement
Recruitment & Retention,
Education Training & Mentoring
Effective Communication,
Knowledge Management &
Best Practices
Healing Environment
Evidence-based Practice and
Processes
Evidence-Based
Practice/Research
Patient Outcomes
Patient Outcomes
Unit Profile
• Key characteristics that define your work
group, unit or microsystem
Leadership Structures & Systems
• How unit leaders ensure a healthy work
environment that delivers the best care for
patients and families
• 150 points
Appropriate Staffing & Staff
Engagement
• How the unit engages, manages and
develops staff?
• 100 points
Effective Communication, Knowledge
Management & Best Practices
• How the unit ensures effective
communication, staff competency and
management of knowledge sharing
• 100 points
Evidence-based Practice
and Processes
• How staff are engaged to achieve better
patient outcomes, improve processes and
stay current with evidence-based practice
and research
• 200 points
Patient Outcomes
• The unit’s key nurse-sensitive patient
outcome measures and results
• 450 points
Application & Review Process
• On-line application submission and
payment process
– $1,500 for 3 year designation
• 38 questions in 6 areas
• Text and charts
Application & Review Process
• Independent review & score
• Senior review
– Executive summary
– Final score
• Feedback report
Award Levels
Beacon Award
for Excellence
Beacon Award
for Excellence
Beacon Award
for Excellence
Bronze Award Silver Award
Gold Award
1.
2.
Overall score
of 250 – 400
points
Most scores at
or above 25%
1.
2.
3.
Overall score
of 350 – 700
points
Most scores at
or above 50%
Few major
gaps in any
area
1.
2.
3.
Overall score
of over 650
points
Most scores at
or above 70%
No major gaps
in any area
Process Evaluation Factor Score Summary - For Criteria 1-4
Approach
Policy Procedures
Processes
Application
100% Know & Can
Apply
0 - 25%
No systematic approach is
evident, although there may be
some anecdotal evidence.
55 - 75%
An effective, systematic
approach is evident, although
there may be gaps in some
areas. May include basic or
surveillance approaches.
The approach is in the early
The approach is applied to some The approach is well applied to
stages of application in most
components and/or in the early most components, although
components. This may represent stages of others. Some gaps or some gaps may be evident.
little or no application of a
weaknesses may be evident.
systematic approach.
Learning
The unit is in the early stages a
In-Process Measures transition from reacting to
Evaluation
problems to a general
improvement orientation.
30 - 50%
The beginning of a systematic
approach to formal policies,
procedures and/or processes is
evident
The unit is beginning a
systematic approach to
evaluation and improvement of
key processes.
This unit uses a fact-based,
systematic evaluation and
improvement process and
some use of evidence-based
approaches, subject matter
experts, and/or benchmarks.
80 - 100%
An effective, systematic
approach, with no gaps is
evident.
The approach is fully applied
without significant weaknesses or
gaps in any components.
This unit uses fact-based,
systematic evaluation and
improvement strategies. Tools,
refinements and innovations are
backed by analysis and sharing
and are evident throughout the
24/7 operations.
Scoring Band
The overall score is NOT intended to be a numerical average of the elements above; select the range and score that is MOST descriptive of the unit's
achievement level for each item.
Criteria 1:
Criteria 2:
Criteria 3:
Criteria 4:
Leadership Structures & Systems - total 150 points
Appropriate Staffing & Staff Engagement - total 100 points
Effective Communication, Knowledge Management & Best Practices - total 100 points
Evidence-Based Practice & Processes - total 200 points
Results Evaluation Factor Score Summary - For Criteria 5
0 - 25%
30 - 50%
55 - 75%
80 - 100%
Performance results are reported for
many to most areas, and good
performance levels are evident in
most areas of relevance to the
practice setting.
Performance results are reported for
all areas, and good to excellent
performance levels are reported in
most areas of relevance to the
practice setting.
Levels
None to few performance results or Some performance results are
poor performance levels in areas reported, and early good
reported.
performance levels are evident in a
few areas.
Trends
Trend data either are not reported
or show mainly adverse trends.
Some trend data are reported, and Trend data is reported for many to
majority of the trends presented are most areas of importance or
favorable.
relevance to the practice setting,
representative of the population
served, and the majority of the
trends presented are favorable.
Comparisons
Little or no comparative information
is reported. If comparative
information is reported, unit's results
are not at national minimum
requirements.
Some current performance
measures have been evaluated
against relevant comparisons,
benchmarks, national measurement
criteria, or national nursing sensitive
outcome indicators, and show areas
of good relative performance.
Trend data is reported for all areas
of importance or relevance to the
practice setting, representative of the
population served. Favorable
trends have been sustained over
time.
Many to most current performance Evidence of industry and
measures have been evaluated
benchmark leadership is
against relevant comparisons,
demonstrated in many areas.
benchmarks, national measurement
criteria, or national nursing sensitive
outcome indicators and show areas
of very good performance. There
may be evidence of achieving better
than benchmark results in some
areas.
Scoring Band
The overall score is NOT intended to be a numerical average of the elements above; selectthe range and score that is MOST descriptive of the unit's achievement level for each
item.
Criteria 5: Patient Outcomes - total 450 points.
Scoring
• Unit will receive a score for each area
– Leadership Structures & Systems
– Appropriate Staffing & Staff Engagement
– Effective Communication, Knowledge
Management & Best Practices
– Evidence-based Practices & Processes
– Patient Outcomes
Scoring
• Category scores will be multiplied by the
total number of points available for that
category
Example - Leadership
150 points * 60% score = 90 points
Scoring
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leadership
Staffing
Communication
Evidence-based practice
Patient outcomes
Total Points
150 * 50% = 75
100 * 65% = 65
100 * 55% = 55
200 * 60% = 120
450 * 40% = 180
495
Resources
• Beacon Criteria Brochure – May
• Beacon Audit Tool - May
• Applying for the Beacon Award for
Excellence Webinar – July
Next Steps
• Read the entire application booklet
• Review the scoring system
• Understand the meaning of key terms in the
glossary
• Prepare the unit profile
• Complete the Beacon assessment tool
• Develop & submit your application
Beacon 2.0 Launch
9/1
Beacon
Reviewers
selected
6/1
Beta testing
begins, &
open COP
to testers
May
June
5/15
Beacon
criteria
launch on
website
July
August
7/30
Applying for
Beacon
Webinar
September
midOctober
Reviewer
training
October
November December
11/1
Beacon 2.0
Launch
Questions?
Thank you for pursuing
excellence
[email protected]
[email protected]

similar documents