Collaborate, Review Data and Change; Repeat

Abstract

Context. The ANSA and TCOM framework, in conjunction with related information, can support data-informed policy planning and funding initiatives. One state’s collaborative data-informed recovery strategies provide an example. The concept of recovery from mental health and substance use disorders evolved from a deficit focus to include functional and personal recovery. Through a collaborative process SAMHSA, the federal behavior health authority, developed recovery’s working definition: “a process of change through which individuals improve their health and wellness, live a self- directed life, and strive to reach their full potential” in four dimensions (Health - overcoming or managing one’s diseases or symptoms, Home – a stable and safe place to live, Purpose - meaningful daily activities, and Community - relationships and social networks that provide support, friendship, love, and hope. Recently, SAMHSA acknowledged that the 2012 framework needs to evolve and issued a Recovery Challenge to community-based organizations to highlight innovative recovery strategies and practices. The challenge requires active, meaningful involvement of individuals with lived experience. Recovery and TCOM frameworks were cross walked to support training and to inform the state’s recovery support strategies. One strategy was to create a Recovery Support Workgroup (RSW) comprised of a dozen state agencies and community stakeholders. More than 51% of RSW members have lived experience with mental health and/or substance use. This group makes data-informed recommendations to state’s Mental Health and Addiction Planning and Advisory Council. Following a statewide 2019 gap analysis, which identified recovery support needs, the RSW created subgroups to address five recovery support needs: Personal support networks, Peer support services, Hobbies and interests, Prevention and wellness, and Safe and affordable housing. Data Collection Methodology. Multiple data sources informed the subgroups’ efforts: a consumer satisfaction survey, social determinants of health survey a Lived Experience Survey distributed through recovery groups, Medicaid claims diagnoses, recovery data collected at recovery organizations, and ANSA data. All data were associated with recovery dimensions: Health, Home, Community and Purpose. For ANSA data, the process required collaboration among the state’s data management, recovery support services, and the IU CANS/ANSA technical assistance teams. Enhancing ANSA Outcome Management Reports. Outcome Management reports, available to the state team, providers, and the IU CANS/ANSA team, were modified to inform the RSW subgroups by formatting reports by recovery dimensions and additional concerns. Building on existing reports (Resolved Actionable Needs, and item level metrics (Actionable, Continuing, Clinical Progress, Newly Identified, and Worsening), three new recovery focused reports were developed. Sharing and using the data. This collaborative, data-informed recovery initiative has received national attention. A variety of strategies to disseminate and to use the results for planning and managing change will be discussed: What has worked? What has been challenging? What has not work? What are the implications for quality improvement, program evaluation, and research?