AHSN-stakeholder research 2015 - Microsoftuclpstorneuprod.blob.core.windows.net/cmsassets/151026... · 2015-10-30 · AHSN-stakeholder research 2015. Overview 2. Survey details 3

AHSN-stakeholder research 2015

Overview

2

Survey details

3

An online survey was administered to stakeholders of the Academic Health Science Networks. Stakeholders were initially pre-identified and provided with the opportunity to comment on any of the following:

• The AHSN which they are identified as having worked with/are associated with;

• Any other AHSN; and• The entire AHSN network at a national level.

In addition, individuals who were not pre-identified as stakeholders were also given the chance to comment on AHSNs of their choosing via open links disseminated by NHS England, other stakeholders, and through AHSNs’ own communication channels.

This report contains responses specifically given in relation to UCL Partners. This is based on 56 responses. In the report, the data is compared against the total figure for all AHSNs for each specific question.

The survey ran between July 9th and 7th August 2015.

Who took part?

26%

21%

12%

12%

6%

5%

4%

4%

2%

1%

0%

7%

18%

7%

16%

18%

13%

4%

7%

9%

2%

7%

Health or social care provider (n=10)

Private industry (n=4)

Clinical Commissioning Group (n=9)

Higher Education Institute (n=10)

Government / ALB (n=7)

Patients group (n=2)

Local government (n=4)

Voluntary and Community Sector (n=5)

Strategic Clinical Network (n=-)

Commissioning Support Unit (n=1)

Local Economic Partnership (n=-)

Other (n=4)

Stakeholder type

All AHSNs(n=1,098)

UCL Partners(n=56)

S1. Which of the following best describes your organisation? S2. Which, if any, of the following applies to your organisation....? S3. Is this response on behalf of your entire organisation or you as an individual?

4

2015

(64%)

Working relationship

52%

57%

4%We see ourselves as amember /partner of the AHSN

We have worked with theAHSN in the last 12 months

Neither of the above

(7%)

(58%)

Note: All AHSN figures in brackets. Multiple choice question.

(53%)

32%68%

The organisation

As an individual

Answering on behalf of their organisation or as an individual

(64%)

Note: All AHSN figures in brackets

(36%)

Sample source

61%

39%

Non pre-identified stakeholders(Open Link)

Pre-identified stakeholder(Targeted list)

Note: All AHSN figures in brackets

(38%)

(62%)

Understanding the results

5

(64%)

A sample of stakeholders were surveyed, rather than the entire population of stakeholders. The percentage results are subject to sampling tolerances – which vary depending on the size of the sample and the percentage concerned.

Confidence levels say how ‘sure’ we are about the results. That is, at 95% confidence level we have 95% probability that the results didn’t happen by chance but are similar to what is real for the population. If the survey was rerun 100 times the results in 95 of those surveys would fall very closely to the first run.

When comparing an individual AHSN’s results to the ‘all AHSNs’ average or other AHSNs, a difference must be of at least a certain size to be statistically significant. The table below illustrates the percentage difference needed based on example size sizes and percentages at the 95% confidence level.

Size of sample Approximate sampling tolerances applicable to percentages at or near these figures (at the 95% confidence level)

90% / 10% 70% / 30% 50%

100 +/- 6 +/- 9 +/-10

70 +/- 7 +/- 11 +/-12

50 +/-8 +/- 13 +/-14

6

Explanation of the positioning graphic

All AHSNs: 80%

This AHSN: 70%

Upper

Middle

Lower

% of those agreeing with the statement Description of the category used

The percentage across all AHSNs followed by percentage for the AHSN specific to this report.

Relative position is indicated by highlighting whether the AHSN occupies a place in the upper, middle or bottom third relative to other AHSNs. Position is shown by the dashed line in the relevant box.

A comparator display has been included to help support the AHSN in their development. Although caution should be taken in light of the sampling tolerance levels outlined previously, AHSNs have indicated it will be useful to understand their results in relation to other AHSNs.

Summary

7

Summary (1)

8

2015• 80% of UCL Partners stakeholders recommend working with it (slide 41) and 28%

feel that it has achieved more than expected in the last 12 months (slide 40).

• Many (67%) agree that it has helped them achieve their objectives in the last year (slide 39), a figure that is 11 percentage points (pp) higher than the all AHSN average.

• 46% have a ‘good’ understanding of its role (slide 11) and the same proportion feel that they have greater clarity about its role in the last 12 months (slide 12).

• Over a third (35%) have a good understanding of UCL Partners’ plans and priorities (slide 14).

• The majority (66%) report having a ‘good working relationship’ with UCL Partners, a relationship that 38% feel has improved in the last year but around one in ten believe has worsened (slide 17).

Summary (2)

9

2015• Two-thirds agree that it has ‘clear and visible leadership’ (slide 19) which is

consistent with the all AHSNs figure and 60% ‘have confidence in the AHSN to deliver its plans and priorities’ (slide 20).

• Again two-thirds feel that its ‘priorities are aligned to local priorities’ (slide 23) but all three measures of engagement and involvement are in the lower third in comparison to other AHSNs. 57% of stakeholders surveyed feel ‘involved in the AHSN’ (slide 24).

• 70% value its work in ‘facilitating collaboration’ and 68% in ‘quality improvement’ work. In the case of the latter views on the value provided are 17pp higher than the all AHSNs average. 60% value its work on the ‘identification, adoption and spread of innovation’ (slides 28 and 29).

• The UCL Partners programmes that most stakeholder are familiar with are its work on cancer (70%), cardiovascular disease (67%) and research (65%) (slide 46).

Understanding the role of the AHSN

10

5

5

5

11

Q. To what extent do you feel you understand the role of the AHSN?

2% 2%

14% 14%

40% 38%

44% 46%

All AHSNs (n=1,100) UCL Partners (n=56)

A goodunderstanding

A fairunderstanding

A littleunderstanding

None at all

Overall, 9

8%

said th

at they h

ave at least a little un

derstan

din

g o

f their A

HSN

’s role

98

% said

that th

ey have at least a little u

nd

erstand

ing o

f the

role

of U

CL Partn

ers

% of those with a good understanding of the

AHSN’s role

All: 44%

UCL Partners : 46%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Please note that net percentages may not be an exact match with the adding of component percentages due to rounding.

12

Q. And thinking about the past 12 months, to what extent has the role of the AHSN become more or less clear?

Net: more clear = % much more clear + % more clearNet: less clear = % much less clear + % less clear

46%

39%

14%

UCL Partners (n=56)

Net: More clear No change Net: Less clear

66%

25%

9%

All AHSNs (N=1,093)

% for whom role has become more clear

All: 66%

14

14

14

UCL Partners : 46%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Understanding of AHSN plans and priorities

13

2

2

2

14

Q. To what extent, if at all, do you understand the AHSN's plans and priorities?

6% 5%

24%

36%

43% 24%

27%35%


A good understanding

A fair understanding

A little understanding

None at all9

5%

said th


nd

erstand

ing o

f UC

L Partn

ersp

lans an

d p

riorities

Overall, 9

4%

said th


nd

erstand

ing o

f their A

HSN

’s p

lans an

d p

riorities

% of those with a good understanding of the

AHSN’s plans and priorities

All: 27%

UCL Partners : 35%

Upper

Middle

Lower


Stakeholder relationship with the AHSN

15

10

10

10

16

Q. Overall, how would you rate your working relationship with your AHSN?

3% 2%4% 9%

19%

21%

35%30%

36% 36%


Very good

Quite good

Neither good norpoor

Quite poor

Very poor

Overall, 7

2%

said th

ey have eith

er a qu

ite goo

d o

r very go

od

wo

rking relatio

nsh

ip w

ith th

eir AH

SN

66

% said

that th

ey have eith

er a qu

ite goo

d o

r very go

od

wo

rking relatio

nsh

ip w

ith U

CL P

artners

% with a quite or very good working

relationship with the AHSN

All: 72%

UCL Partners : 66%

Upper

Middle

Lower


17

Q. Thinking back over the past 12 months, would you say your working relationship with the AHSN has got better, worse, or is about the same?

2% 2%5%

9%

36%

51%

28%

23%

29%

15%


A lot better

A little better

About the same

A little worse

A lot worse

Overall, 5

6%

said th

at their w

orkin

g relation

ship

with

th

eir AH

SN h

as got b

etter over th

e last 12

mo

nth

s

38

%said

that th

eir wo

rking relatio

nsh

ip w

ith U

CL

Partn

ers has go

t better o

ver the last 1

2 m

on

ths

% relationship has got a lot or little better in the

last 12 months

All: 56%

15

15

15

UCL Partners : 38%

Upper

Middle

Lower


Stakeholder perceptions

18

19

Q. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following?

The AHSN has clear and visible leadership

69%

15%

11%

5%

66%

10%

18%

6%

UCL Partners (n=50)

Net agree Neither disagree nor agree

Net disagree Don’t know

All AHSNs (N=1,048)

Net agree = % strongly agree + % tend to agreeNet disagree = % strongly disagree + % tend to disagree

% agree the AHSN has clear and visible

leadership

All: 69%

9

9

9

UCL Partners : 66%

Upper

Middle

Lower

20


I have confidence in the AHSN to deliver its plans and priorities

60%21%

13%

6%

60%

12%

22%

6%

UCL Partners (n=50)



All AHSNs (N=1,048)


% agree have confidence to deliver plans and

priorities

All: 60%

7

7

7

UCL Partners : 60%

Upper

Middle

Lower

21


AHSN staff are knowledgeable

82%

0

8%

10%

UCL Partners (n=50)



73%

15%

5%6%

All AHSNs (N=1,048)


% agree AHSN staff are knowledgeable

All: 73%

3

3

3

UCL Partners : 82%

Upper

Middle

Lower

22


AHSN staff are helpful

82%

4%

8%

6%

UCL Partners (n=50)



80%

11%

4%5%

All AHSNs (N=1,048)


% agree that AHSN staff are helpful

All: 80%

8

8

8

UCL Partners : 82%

Upper

Middle

Lower

23


AHSN priorities are aligned to local priorities

66%

8%

14%

12%

UCL Partners (n=50)



61%20%

11%

8%

All AHSNs (N=1,048)


% agree that AHSN priorities are aligned to

local priorities

All: 61%

5

5

5

UCL Partners : 66%

Upper

Middle

Lower

14

14

14

14

14

14

24

Q. To what extent do you agree or disagree that in the last 12 months?

22%

22%

29%

31%

26%

29%

31%

20%

33%

22%

37%

29%

20%

24%

20%

20%

17%

12%

14%

18%

7%

12%

11%

20%

9%

12%

5%

8%

7%

10%

4%

2%

6%

6%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All AHSNs (n=1003)

UCL Partners (n=49)

All AHSNs (n=1003)

UCL Partners (n=49)

All AHSNs (n=1003)

UCL Partners (n=49)

Strongly agree Tend to agree Neither agree nor disagree

Tend to disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know

You have felt involved in the AHSN

The AHSN has engaged with you effectively when developing its plans and priorities

The AHSN has listened to your views

Net agree = % strongly agree + % tend to agree

% of those who agree that…..

All: 62% Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 53%

UCL Partners: 43%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 62%

UCL Partners: 57%

Upper

Middle

Lower

UCL Partners: 53%

Please note that the Net % on the right hand side may not be an exact match with the adding of two percentages due to rounding.

Attitudes towards AHSN staff

25

26

Theme(s) identified within the answers provided by specific stakeholder groups include:

Q. If you have any comments about the AHSN’s staff, leadership and priorities, please type in below

“Staff I have been in contact with are excellent so it gives me confidence that the organisation is delivering results but I'm not quite sure what they are.”

Clinical Commissioning Group

Theme: Awareness

“The AHSN's priorities are not well known in primary care.”

“Well led by David Fish, with a number of talented individuals.”

Health or social care provider

Theme: Quality

“An impressive organisation that is grounded in the practicalities of delivering good health.”

“Excellent support and mentorship. Quick to respond for advice etc.”

“Professor Sir David Fish is an exceptional and inspiring leader. His direct reports are excellent but spread very thinly. The quality of support staff is very high.”

Other

Theme: Quality

“Excellent, intellectual and grounded.”

“Excellent leadership in David Fish and team and support of highly knowledgeable board.”

Value associated with the level of support provided

27

2

2

2

8

8

8

7

7

7

4

4

4

Q. The AHSN aims to work with organisations on the following themes. For each theme, how valuable or not has been the support from the AHSN in the last 12 months?

Commissioning support

Position indicator:% of those who think that that the AHSN has

provided valuable support on….

28

25%

26%

36%

32%

51%

68%

48%

50%

15%

14%

16%

12%

13%

8%

10%

4%

25%

24%

21%

26%

17%

10%

19%

16%

36%

36%

27%

30%

20%

14%

23%

30%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

Net valuable Net not valuable Not received support Not applicable

Commercial development

Patient safety

Quality improvement

Net valuable = % very valuable + % quite valuable

All: 51%

UCL Partners: 68%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 48%

UCL Partners: 50%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 36%

UCL Partners: 32%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 25%

UCL Partners: 26%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Q. The AHSN aims to work with organisations on the following themes. For each theme, how valuable or not has been the support from the AHSN in the last 12 months? [continued from previous page]

Position indicator:% of those who think that that AHSN has

provided valuable support on..

29

46%

58%

67%

70%

62%

60%

16%

14%

13%

8%

16%

18%

19%

12%

14%

16%

14%

14%

20%

16%

6%

6%

9%

8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

All AHSNs (n=1011)

UCL Partners (n=50)

Net valuable Net not valuable Not received support Not applicable

Providing leadership to the local health

economy

Facilitating collaboration

Identification, adoption and

spread of innovation

Net valuable = % very valuable + % quite valuable

All: 67%

UCL Partners: 70%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 62%

UCL Partners: 60%

Upper

Middle

Lower

All: 46%

UCL Partners: 58%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Preferred methods of communication between AHSN and stakeholders

30

31

Q. Which, if any, of the following are or would be your preferred ways for the AHSN to communicate with you?

11%

21%

23%

49%

50%

71%

77%

13%

21%

26%

51%

60%

70%

70%

Printed newsletters

Social media

Telephone

One to one meetings

Presentations to peer networks

Workshops, consultations or events

Email newsletter

UCL Partners (n=47) All AHSNs (n=998)

Impressions of AHSN performance & effectiveness

32

5

5

5

2

2

2

7

7

7

33

Q. Overall, how would you rate the AHSN’s…

30%

50%

29%

37%

30%

33%

36%

26%

38%

35%

37%

33%

14%

13%

15%

15%

15%

15%

3%

5%

7%

9%

3%

2%

5%

7%

4%

2%

14%

9%

9%

7%

7%

9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

Very good Quite good Neither good nor poor Quite poor Very poor Don’t know

Accessibility

Responsiveness

Net good = % very good + % quite good

Quality of advice

Position indicator:% of those who rate the AHSN as

very / quite good for…

All: 67%

UCL Partners: 72%

All: 67%

All: 65%

UCL Partners: 76%

UCL Partners: 65%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Upper

Middle

Lower

Upper

Middle

Lower


4

4

4

34

Q. Overall, how would you rate the AHSN’s…[continued from previous page]

24%

37%

35%

43%

28%

35%

32%

28%

34%

28%

37%

37%

20%

17%

12%

13%

16%

11%

6%

7%

5%

7%

5%

7%

5%

2%

2%

4%

14%

9%

11%

9%

10%

11%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

All AHSNs (n=991)

UCL Partners (n=46)

Very good Quite good Neither good nor poor Quite poor Very poor Don’t know

Quality of support

Knowledge of the local

landscape

Net good = % very good + % quite good

Promoting change in the

local health economy

Position indicator:% of those who rate the

AHSN as good for…

All: 69%

UCL Partners: 72%

All: 65%

All: 56%

UCL Partners: 65%

UCL Partners: 72%

Upper

Middle

Lower

Upper

Middle

Lower

Upper

Middle

Lower


35

Q. How effective or ineffective is the AHSN in doing each of the

following? Focusing on the needs of patients and local populations

61%12%

9%

18%

74%

9%

2%

15%

UCL Partners (n=46)

Net effective Neither effective nor ineffective

Net ineffective Not sure

All AHSNs (N=986)

Net effective = % very effective + % quite effectiveNet ineffective = % quite ineffective + % very ineffective

% effective at focusing on the needs of patients and

local populations

All: 61%

1

1

1

UCL Partners : 74%

Upper

Middle

Lower

36


following? Building a culture of partnership and collaboration

78%

11%

9%2%

UCL Partners (n=46)



67%

12%

13%

8%

All AHSNs (N=986)


% effective at building a culture of partnership and

collaboration

All: 67%

2

2

2

UCL Partners : 78%

Upper

Middle

Lower

37


following? Speeding up adoption of innovation into practice

61%

9%

20%

11%

UCL Partners (n=46)



51%

17%

14%

19%

All AHSNs (N=986)


% effective at speeding up adoption of innovation

into practice

All: 51%

4

4

4

UCL Partners : 61%

Upper

Middle

Lower

38


following? Creating wealth

30%

7%

17%

46%

UCL Partners (n=46)



28%

21%11%

39%

All AHSNs (N=986)


% effective at creating wealth

All: 28%

5

5

5

UCL Partners : 30%

Upper

Middle

Lower

39

Q. Thinking about the last 12 months to what extent would you agree or disagree that the AHSN has helped you / your organisation achieve your objectives?

3%

9%9%

10%11%

21%

13%

35%

39%

21%28%

All AHSNs (n=982) UCL Partners (n=46)

Strongly agree

Tend to agree

Neither agree nordisagree

Tend to disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know

Overall, 5

6%

said th

at they agreed

that

their A

HSN

help

ed th

em to

achieve th

eir o

bjectives in

the last 1

2 m

on

ths

67

%said

that th

ey agreed th

at UC

L Partn

ers help

ed th

em to

ach

ieve their o

bjectives in

the last 1

2 m

on

ths

Net agree = % strongly agree + % tend to agree

% agreeing that AHSN has helped you / your

organisation achieve its objectives

All: 56%

2

2

2

UCL Partners : 67%

Upper

Middle

Lower


40

Q. Has the AHSN achieved more or less than you expected in the last 12 months?

11%15%

7%

13%13%

7%

37%37%

24%20%

9% 9%

All AHSNs (n=981) UCL Partners (n=46)

Much more

Somewhat more

About what wasexpected

Somewhat less

Much less

Not sure

Overall, 3

2%

said th

at they th

ink th

at th

eir AH

SN ach

ieved m

ore th

an

expected

over th

e last 12

mo

nth

s

28

%said

that th

ey thin

k that U

CL P

artners ach

ieved

mo

re than

expected

over th

e last 12

mo

nth

s

Net more than expected = % much more + % somewhat more

% stating AHSNs have achieved more than expected

in the last 12 months

All: 32%

10

10

10

UCL Partners : 28%

Upper

Middle

Lower


41

Q. Would you recommend involvement in /working with the AHSN to others?

80%

4%

15%

UCL Partners (n=46)

Yes No Not sure

75%

7%

18%

All AHSNs (N=976)

% that would recommend involvement in / working

with the AHSN

All: 75%

5

5

5

UCL Partners : 80%

Upper

Middle

Lower

42


Q. What would you like AHSNs to keep doing?

Other

“Collaborating and providing the evidence and support to get complex programmes sustainably working.”

Patients group

“Their excellent scientific collaborations; their knowledge sharing network events.”

Local government

“Bringing together multi disciplinary groups to tackle Londoners health needs, with more focus on prevention and inequality.”


“The support on quality improvement linked to major initiatives such as the cardiac and cancer services reconfigurations..”

No consistent themes. Above are some examples of quotes from different groups.

43


Q. What improvements could the AHSNs make over the next 12 months?

“Work more closely with CCG in planning what subjects they are covering, also need to be more transparent and any industry support needs to be agreed with CCG members.”


No consistent themes. Above are some examples of quotes from different groups.

“Get out more. Listen more.”Local government

“Greater visibility externally - external comms and profile with entrepreneurs.”

Other

“Clearer, stronger links with the voluntary and community organisations in the patch, with more awareness of the funding needs of the VCS; getting seconded staff into our organisation via UCLP would be wonderful, for example.”

Patients group

“Share their intentions and strategies with wider stakeholders of healthcare to identify whether there is potential to speed up initiatives by working together.”

Other

“Build more local input to different geographies to ensure we draw effectively on the good work going on.”

Health or social care provider

AHSN specific questions

44

45

2015

20%

13%

33%

20%

11%

4%

UCL Partners (n=46)

Less than once a year

At least yearly

About once every 6 months

Every 2-3 months

Once or twice a month

Once a week

2-3 times per week

Daily

How often would you say you are in contact with UCL Partners?

46

2015

2%

35%

37%

41%

46%

48%

54%

57%

59%

59%

65%

67%

70%

None of the above

Neuroscience

Diabetes

Patient and public involvement and engagement

Co-morbidities and frailty

Children, young people and maternal health

Quality and value

Informatics

Mental health

Innovation

Research

Cardiovascular disease

Cancer

Which UCL Partners initiatives or programmes are you aware of? Please tick all that apply

Base: all (46)

Documents

AHSN-stakeholder research 2015 - Microsoftuclpstorneuprod.blob.core.windows.net/cmsassets/151026... · 2015-10-30 · AHSN-stakeholder research 2015. Overview 2. Survey details 3