Steering Committee: April 3, 2019

In attendance: Juveria, Sophie, Dielle, Sarah, Jasmyn, Chelsi, Lillian, Augustina, Dayna, Sanjeev, Aristotle, Paul

Action Items

Operational

Connect Janet/Melanie with Juveria/Sophie regarding QI discussion – Chelsi
PSSP specialists to give another reminder to complete the training evaluation – Chelsi to send PSSP team email
Send example CIHR annual report to team – Dielle
Project Management Tool
Follow up with EPMO for their tool – Dielle
Asana Cost – Jasmyn
REB Amendments – Jasmyn

Committees

Implementation Committee

Youth Advisory Committee

Update service user document with Sarah and Family Advisory Committee comments – Jasmyn
Approve the Terms of Reference – Steering Committee

Minutes

Qualitative Interviews/Data Collection Discussion

Qualitative Interviews (semi-structured) done at CAMH after the implementation of Navigate – pilot study

Goal: To have a deeper understanding of early intervention frameworks, to improve the implementation of care, uncover barriers and facilitators and local contexts, and privilege the experiences of the patients, families and providers who are participating in these programs
43 people included, comprised of stakeholders, clinicians, physicians, family members, and patients
Finished coding in November
Budget included transcription costs, RA salary and an honoraria for clients and family members
This is only the second qualitative study to explore clients’ experiences of coordinated specialty care in first episode psychosis, and the first that explores family and care provider perspectives
This is the first study that integrates multiple perspectives to understand the implementation, barriers and facilitators, and experiences of coordinated specialty care in first episode psychosis.

· 3 manuscripts currently in progress

“Client, family and provider perspectives of measurement-based care in first episode psychosis” – presented at Slaight day
“Client and family perspectives on facilitating engagement in first episode psychosis programs” – measuring patient and family members engagement, having their perspectives shown
“Negotiating medication management in first episode psychosis: client, family and provider perspectives” – Collaborative medication management – how do we negotiate medication
A lot of the family saying ‘I am so lucky to live in Toronto’ because they have many resources
More so about their experience rather than the implementation of NAVIGATE

Qualitative proposal

Would conduct a similar evaluation, either through videoconferencing and in-person (like the pilot at CAMH) across the 3 sites to

Understand provider and stakeholder attitudes, experiences, facilitators and barriers for implementation at a local level
Explore the experiences of clients and families enrolled in this program.

Patient and family interviews should be done towards the end of the project
Care providers interviews should probably be done twice, once early on (what where your anxieties before implementing) and one at the end for interviews around what their experiences are now
Collaborating with Janet and Melanie regarding these interviews
Should be a blend of the two qualitative interviews. Would be good to connect with Janet/Melanie to see what they already have built in, to eliminate any duplication. Viewing their framework and see if you can expand on their developed structure.
How is important is the patient and family piece – their experiences of the Navigate model. The fourth objective measures patient and family engagement across the project (for the advisory teams). It may be good to focus on the clinical team interviews now and then the patient/family QI towards the end of the project
Question: Did we look at the results for the study that was done at Slaight? What came out of it and what was done for the quality of care? Generally people were responsive and Juveria presented these results at Slaight Day and to the clinician team so they can incorporate them into their practice. Planning for knowledge translation for the whole province (across the 3 sites)

REB Component

To take a pause on putting in an amendment until they figure out the QI component for the qualitative piece of the implementation
Will not go within the initial amendment – will take some more time

Youth Advisory Committee

Incorporating Sarah’s comments regarding consistent language
Taking out the work ‘burden’ as per a comment from the family advisory committee – Chelsi to send Jasmyn the family advisory comments
Approve the Terms of Reference (if no comments are given by end of day tomorrow, approval will be assumed)

In-Person Training Evaluation

Contracts

Aristotle to potentially reach out to CEO of Lakeridge as fidelity needs to be done before they start implementing. Lakeridge is starting implementation for their new consult appointments.
Mainly just a work flow issues, contract is sitting there

CIHR Annual Reports

We do have an annual report and they will send us a report for an example – Dielle to send to the team
Good that it is annual as it keeps us on track and forces us to be account--able
Aristotle sent the ministry an update report, including the site leads. Also reminded them of the conference call to be had beginning of May

Project Management Tool

Plan U: Lillian uses it, though it has to be programmed
Asana: PSSP suggested it, though there is a cost – Jasmyn to email and use the terminology ‘academic institution’
Microsoft Project
EPMO: what tool do they use? Dielle to follow up with Stephanie Carter.

WHO DAS

ECHO

SC Committee Update Scheduling

1st Wednesday of the Month:

2nd Wednesday of the Month:

3rd Wednesday of the Month:

Recent Posts