|
Chapter 1
Introduction to the HIV Service
Delivery Models
and the Steering Committee
On October 1, 1994, the Special Projects of National
Significance (SPNS) Program of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
funded an HIV Innovative Model of Care Initiative consisting of 27 cooperative agreements,
HRSA, and an Evaluation and Dissemination Center (EDC). The EDC was funded through a
subcontract within one of the cooperative agreements.
Individual projects were funded for periods ranging from two
to five years. During the duration of the projects, each was to participate in the
Steering Committee for the cooperative agreements as a condition of funding. As stated in
the original Program Guidance, the cooperative agreement mechanism allows for substantial
post-award programmatic participation of federal staff in the operation and evaluation of
projects. Each service delivery project is responsible for ensuring representation on the
Steering Committee which oversees cooperative agreement activities within the group of
projects. As a condition of award, service delivery projects are responsible for
participating in the evaluation of their projects as guided by the Steering Committee. The
Evaluation and Dissemination Center provides technical expertise and assistance to the
Steering Committee and individual grantees, and coordinates the implementation of
evaluations and dissemination from the overall group of grantees. The HRSA representative
to the Steering Committee is a full and active member in the development and
implementation of the program, providing guidance and coordination for certain
programmatic activities to a degree beyond customary responsibilities in grants
administration.
The cooperative agreement funding mechanism was selected for
a variety of reasons. These reasons included the following. First, it was hoped that the
cooperative agreement mechanism would help projects identify shared goals and objectives.
Second, the cooperative agreement mechanism would enable projects to meet on a regular
basis and share technical expertise among projects, and with outside experts, on
programmatic concerns, staffing issues, and evaluation. Third, the cooperative agreement
mechanism would enable a cross-cutting evaluation of major clusters of projects.
A. HRSA Call for Proposals
In the Spring of 1994, the Health Resources and Services
Administration issued a Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA). The NOFA solicited proposals
both for cooperative agreements and for an Evaluation and Dissemination Center which would
also serve as the coordinating entity for the Cooperative Agreement Steering Committee.
The NOFA suggested that projects would be funded for periods of up to five years each.
The Program Guidance, issued subsequent to the NOFA,
identified a number of different possible areas for funding. The purpose of the
solicitation was to request applications that would further address the SPNS Program goal
to advance knowledge and skills in health and support services delivery to people with HIV
infection. The 27 programmatic projects or cooperative agreements recommended for funding
proposed grant periods ranging from two to five years. The Evaluation and Dissemination
Center was recommended to receive five years of funding. Of the programmatic projects, two
received two years of funding, eight received three years of funding, three received four
years of funding, and 14 received five years of funding. Appendix I shows the funding
cycles for all of the projects along with a brief abstract of each project.
Applicants submitted proposals that frequently covered more
than one of the general areas specified in the Program Guidance. In addition, for any one
of the Program Guidance areas, different methodologies were used. The methodologies ranged
from clinic-based or alternative services to individuals knowledge and behavior
change, to institutions and individuals using techniques of advocacy and training. Many
projects combined methodologies.
B. Clusters of Projects Funded
For the purposes of managing the cooperative agreements,
sharing project expertise, and permitting cross-cutting evaluations, projects initially
were assigned to one of five clusters of projects. Projects were clustered based on
similarities in methods, outcomes, and/or processes. During the second year of the
Cooperative Agreement Steering Committee, projects continued to work together in five Work
Groups. At the end of the second year, projects were aligned in the following way. Several
projects participated in more than one Work Group.
- Capitated Care. Five of the projects share, as a
central theme, the study of the health care provided to individuals with HIV disease under
models where the health care is capitated, or paid on a "flat fee" basis per
patient per month. The Capitated Care projects differ in the ways that they provide health
care, ranging from a community-based clinic (East Boston Neighborhood Health Center)
to a large "chain" of community-based clinics (AIDS Healthcare Foundation)
to a home-based hospice (Visiting Nurse Association of Los Angeles) to
university-based clinics (Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine) to a
state-wide system (New York State Department of Health/Health Research). Each
project shares the goals of determining costs for providing health care services to
HIV/AIDS patients under a capitated care system and of ensuring that high quality care is
provided under such a system. As a group, the models and their implementation are quite
different from one another; taken collectively, the experiences should serve to define
those instances in which a capitated care system for the provision of HIV/AIDS-related
services is appropriate and those conditions in which it is not.
- Community-Based Organization (CBO) Models. Six
projects share, as a central theme, the goal of providing high-quality care for
individuals with HIV who belong to groups that are traditionally underserved because of
linguistic, cultural, racial, and economic barriers that prevent their full integration
into the traditional hospital-based service system. Outreach, Inc., has implemented
a program wherein substance abusers, many of whom are African Americans living in public
housing projects, are offered a number of social services to link them to the traditional
care system. PROTOTYPES has implemented a "Settlement House model"
wherein women with HIV come with their children and receive a number of social services as
well as linkages to medical services. If appropriate, substance abusers with HIV are
enrolled in a residential treatment program. The Well-Being Institute has developed
a three-tier program wherein substance abusing women with HIV are offered the opportunity
to receive health, social and support services well before such time as they decide to
stop using drugs, and are later offered the opportunity to participate in a 60-day drug
treatment program combined with housing in a drug-free environment. Finally, when they
have been enrolled and retained successfully in primary care and have stopped using drugs,
the women work together in a revenue-generating, entrepreneurial activity, making and
selling crafts. The Center for Community Health, Education, and Research/Haitian
Community AIDS Outreach Project (CCHER/HAP) provides case management and other
culturally-appropriate social services to individuals with HIV in the large Haitian
community of greater Boston. CCHER/HAP is a unique hospital and community-based model of
case management which blends services from two fronts to better serve Haitians with HIV. The
Fortune Society targets Latinos with HIV who are in prison and offers a
combination of educational programs, social support, and legal assistance services both
while the client is in prison and after release. Larkin Street Services has
developed a comprehensive continuum of services for homeless youth living with HIV in San
Francisco which includes psychosocial support, medical care, educational and vocational
services, and housing. Common to all of the CBO programs is the development of alternate
models of care specifically targeted to individuals who have traditionally been
underserved. In all of these models, services are provided by a combination of
professional staff and "paraprofessional" or "recovering" staff who
share many of the same demographic and experiential characteristics of the target clients.
- Comprehensive Healthcare. Three projects are
developing specialized medical care models within the context of a continuum of services
in a medical clinic. The University of Vermont & State Agricultural College has
developed three community clinics throughout Vermont to assess a model of comprehensive
HIV care in a rural area. The University of Nevada School of Medicine has added a
nutrition component to its comprehensive AIDS care clinic and is studying the effects of
adding nutrition assessment, objective measurements, counseling, and supplements to the
treatment of wasting in AIDS patients. Both the University of Vermont & State
Agricultural College and the University of Nevada projects are providing services to
largely rural patient populations. The Washington University project in St. Louis,
Missouri is providing a continuum of care to women with HIV and their children within a
traditional medical clinic model combined with aggressive community outreach and case
management. The Washington University project serves a group of inner city women, most of
whom are African American.
- Infrastructure-Advocacy. Projects in the
Infrastructure-Advocacy group aim to increase the capacity of local health and social
support service systems to provide appropriate, quality services for individuals with HIV.
The projects in this group are using methods of service systems development through
training and technical assistance to change the service provider infrastructure as well as
the community context in which these services are delivered. The Center for Women
Policy Studies, through the Metro DC Collaborative for Women with HIV/AIDS (with PROTOTYPES),
is increasing the ability of service providers in the metropolitan District of Columbia
area to provide services to women with HIV through leadership development with
HIV-positive women, policy change, needs assessment, and appropriately-targeted training. Health
Initiatives for Youth has developed a media, training, and technical assistance center
to promote youth-appropriate and youth-friendly HIV services. The Michigan Protection
and Advocacy Service provides training and technical assistance to consumers and
service providers regarding HIV legal issues in the areas of employment, confidentiality,
health care, accessing social security, and public policy. The Indiana Community AIDS
Action Network provides legal assistance to individual clients to redress
discriminatory practices by health care providers, employers and others. In addition, this
project provides training in legal rights, advocacy skills building, grassroots organizing
and public policy advocacy. The Hektoen Institute for Medical Research at the Cook
County Hospitals HIV Primary Care Center/Women and Children HIV Program is
increasing the ability of the service infrastructure to provide early identification and
linkage into care of women with HIV by training maternal and child health providers on how
to provide HIV education counseling and testing by consent. This project is also educating
providers on the use of zidovudine to reduce perinatal transmission of HIV. The State
University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn is developing systems
to support and encourage women to be tested for HIV, especially during pregnancy. If
positive, women are routed to appropriate medical services. These services include
strategies to reduce perinatal transmission as well as on-going HIV primary and
gynecologic care. Training and technical assistance to private providers is a major
component of systems change necessary to the Brooklyn project. The University of Texas
Health Science Center at San Antonio is developing a model wherein local service
agencies and consumers learn strategies for developing comprehensive models of care for
women with HIV and their children. The model is a combination of infrastructure
development and training. The Missouri Department of Health, through training and
agency development strategies, is systematically developing the capacity of
Missouris HIV/AIDS service providers and mental health agencies to provide services
for individuals with multiple diagnoses of HIV/AIDS and mental illness and/or substance
abuse.
- Training. While training is integral to almost all of
these projects, seven have identified training among their most key elements. These
projects include the following. The University of Mississippi Medical Center has
developed a training program for physicians, dentists, and nurses in rural and urban
settings throughout Mississippi. The training programs have been designed so that medical
workers in rural settings who are not comfortable treating patients with AIDS will have
increased knowledge and the ability to provide appropriate care. The University of
Colorado Health Sciences Center has developed an eight-state program to compare
different ways of providing medical information to health care providers. The Interamerican
College of Physicians and Surgeons has developed a culturally appropriate training
program for Hispanic physicians so that they can be trained in the management of patients
with HIV disease. A key element of this program is a series of office visits to the
physician by another Hispanic physician who has been trained in the management of AIDS.
The University of Washington has developed a training program in neuropsychiatric
illness associated with HIV disease with an emphasis on delirium, and ways of developing
greater expertise among practitioners. Emory University has instituted a training
program for health care providers who provide HIV-related medical services to inmates in
the Georgia State prison system. Health Initiatives for Youth has developed a
training center for health care, social service, and other service providers to increase
their capacity to provide services in an appropriate and sensitive way to youth and
adolescents. The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio is using
training methods to develop a comprehensive continuum of services for women with HIV and
their children.
In addition to the programmatic projects, there is an
Evaluation and Dissemination Center (EDC). Continuing in the second year, the EDC has
provided technical assistance to HRSA/HAB's SPNS grantees in designing and implementing
evaluation studies and dissemination activities for their individual projects. The EDC
also assists grantees in developing and coordinating the implementation of multi-site
evaluations within groups of similar projects. In addition, the EDC coordinates and
facilitates the activities of the Steering Committee, such as preparing reports and
presentations. The EDC also provides technical assistance to HRSA.
The EDC is a consortium headed by The Measurement Group and
also includes PROTOTYPES. The Measurement Group provides overall management for the EDC
and is responsible for evaluation and dissemination activities. PROTOTYPES is responsible
for logistical support of the Steering Committee meetings and dissemination activities.
C. Structure and Decision-Making Processes of the
Steering Committee for the Cooperative Agreement Projects
In its first year, the Steering Committee evolved a fairly
straightforward decision making process which has worked well. Each of the 27 member
project representatives has one vote; the Evaluation and Dissemination Center
representative has one vote; and the Health Resources and Services Administration
representative has one vote. In addition to the chair of the Steering Committee, each of
the Work Groups annually elects a chair. Together with the HRSA representative and the
Director of the Evaluation and Dissemination Center, the chairs of the Work Groups form an
ad hoc Executive Committee that holds telephone meetings between scheduled,
face-to-face Steering Committee meetings usually to set the Steering Committee
meeting agenda and rules. Day-to-day operations of the Steering Committee including
logistics, communications, and consultation are guided by an Operations Committee
consisting of the Steering Committee Chair, the HRSA representative, and the EDC Director.
The EDC Director takes responsibility for ensuring that the decisions of the Operations
Committee, the Executive Committee, and the larger Steering Committee are implemented.
Figure 1-1 shows the decision making and organizational structure of the Steering
Committee. This structure which initially evolved in the first year of the Cooperative
Agreement has been elaborated and consolidated during the second year. The Steering
Committee has found this to be an effective method for managing its activities.

Figure 1-1. Organizational structure and
responsibilities within the Steering Committee of the cooperative agreements.
Back to Table of Contents
Go To Chapter 2

© Copyright 1998-2005 by The Measurement Group LLC. All rights
reserved. |