Evaluation Plan for South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Integrated Care Strategy

Project Status

Chief Investigators
Dr Karen Gardner, CPHCE (Coordinator), Dr Julie McDonald, CPHCE/SEaRCH , Ms Karen Edwards, Counterpoint Consulting Pty Ltd, A/Prof Gawaine Powell Davies CPHCE

Other team members
Ms Rachael Kearns, CPHCE/SEaRCH

Project Background and Rationale

SESLHD has been implementing an Integrated Care Strategy based on the English NHS House of Care model. While the strategy includes a broad evaluation approach, a more comprehensive and detailed framework and plan is needed to ensure a consistent approach to the evaluation of the strategy’s overall goals.

The goal of the Integrated Care Strategy is to create an agile joined up system based on patient centred care and a health intelligence structure to enable targeted action through innovative models that deliver care proactively. The achievement of this goal is supported by change management and robust evaluation that will allow transfer and spread of successful ways of working. The focus of the strategy is on two priority cohorts: a) people with diabetes, and b) older people with complex needs.  Four key priority areas have been identified in the Plan. These are:

  1. Engage with people and communities through person centred planning and evaluation.
  2. Develop a health intelligence system.
  3. Use innovative models to target areas of need.
  4. Utilise central support structures to evaluate, transfer and spread successful models.

Project Aim

To develop an evaluation plan and protocol for the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Integrated Care Strategy.

Project Design and Method

The evaluation plan will include: a) the evaluation questions and describe how they will be answered; b) the elements of a systematic approach to integrated care; c) how the elements of the NHS House of Care relate to the core priorities in the Strategy; d) the evaluation design and methods; e) the logic models and implementation road maps for each of the  four priority areas; f)  indicators; and existing and additional data sources and limitations; g) a detailed evaluation protocol  and ethics application.