Performance Excellence Initiative 2010 Facts & Figures: Benchmark Data

Performance Excellence Initiative Performance Excellence Initiative

2010 Facts & Figures: Benchmark Data2010 Facts & Figures: Benchmark Data

Presented by:Presented by:

Larry Weishaar, Vice President for Support Services, ResCareLarry Weishaar, Vice President for Support Services, ResCare

Rebecca Guess, Sr. Research Analyst, DeytaRebecca Guess, Sr. Research Analyst, Deyta

What is the criteria for a valid benchmark?What is the criteria for a valid benchmark?

• One provider cannot make up 50% of a reporting group. One provider cannot make up 50% of a reporting group.

• A valid benchmark takes years to generate.A valid benchmark takes years to generate.

• Therefore the data reported within this report is Therefore the data reported within this report is NOTNOT statistically valid. statistically valid.

• Smaller sample size.Smaller sample size.

PE National BenchmarkPE National Benchmark

20102010


2010 Metrics2010 Metrics

DSP RatesDSP Rates

• TurnoverTurnover

• StabilityStability

• RetentionRetention

SatisfactionSatisfaction

• EmployeeEmployee

• Family/GuardianFamily/Guardian

• ConsumerConsumer

Required:Required: Required:Required:


Proposed ScheduleProposed Schedule

•PreventivePreventive Healthcare Healthcare

• Desired Health Care Outcome MeasuresDesired Health Care Outcome Measures Communicable DiseasesCommunicable Diseases Heart ConditionHeart Condition

InfectionsInfections StrokeStroke

DiabetesDiabetes Dental HealthDental Health

ObesityObesity


Proposed ScheduleProposed Schedule

•PreventivePreventive Healthcare Healthcare

• Valued Health Care OutcomesValued Health Care Outcomes VaccinationsVaccinations

Weight ManagementWeight Management

Blood Pressure ManagementBlood Pressure Management

Dental CareDental Care

MedicationsMedications

Performance ExcellencePerformance Excellence

*Estimated # of People Served in 2010 *Estimated # of People Served in 2010 36,69936,699

1730

3915

891501

304

697

5513

1017

2462

465

810

929

171

839

536

833

305

1462

110895

26

DE: 199

90

925

372

MD 640

85

59

388

NJ 72

2418

149

119

AK: 659

* Estimated numbers based on provider’s self-report data and averages.

* Additional states may be represented by multi-state providers.

MA 195

37 States Represented

PE National BenchmarkPE National Benchmark# Served Annual Comparisons# Served Annual Comparisons

29,205

36,699

58,349

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2008 2009 2010

Years

Nu

mb

er S

erve

d

Performance Excellence Performance Excellence

DSP TURNOVER RATEDSP TURNOVER RATEThe turnover rate for direct service professionals reports The turnover rate for direct service professionals reports the amount the amount of turnover an organization experiences on an annual basis. This of turnover an organization experiences on an annual basis. This metric reports the number of people who leave an organization in one metric reports the number of people who leave an organization in one year divided by the total number positions within that organization.year divided by the total number positions within that organization.

FOCUS LEVEL: ANCOR DSP Turnover Rate

Numerator 17,627

Denominator 67,586

2010 Benchmark Turnover Rate 26.1%

Calculations from Assessing Retention Outcomes; Sheryl Larson (June 13, 2000)


Percentage

26.1%

45.8%

34.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

2008 2009 2010Years

Turnover Annual ComparisonsTurnover Annual Comparisons

4.18

4.08

4.10

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

2008 Results2008 Results 2009 Results2009 Results

Overall I enjoy working in this organizationOverall I enjoy working in this organization

2008 – 2009 - 2010 Comparison Report

Employee Satisfaction & Turnover

2010 Results2010 Results

34.5%

26.1%

45.8%

3.91

3.77

3.75

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00


Likelihood I would recommend this Likelihood I would recommend this

organization to my family and friendsorganization to my family and friends


Employee Satisfaction & Turnover


34.5%

26.1%

45.8%

• Overall turnover decreased in 2010 Overall turnover decreased in 2010 (26.1%), when compared with the results (26.1%), when compared with the results from 2009 (45.8%) and 2008 (34.5%).from 2009 (45.8%) and 2008 (34.5%).

• No significant relationship between No significant relationship between employee satisfaction compared with employee satisfaction compared with turnover in 2009 and 2008.turnover in 2009 and 2008.


Turnover: 26.1%Turnover: 26.1%

Turnover Noteworthy FindingsTurnover Noteworthy Findings


DSP STABILITY RATEDSP STABILITY RATE

The stability rate for direct service professionals reports longevity The stability rate for direct service professionals reports longevity of employees within an organization. The stability rate reports the of employees within an organization. The stability rate reports the number of people working for the organization for one year or number of people working for the organization for one year or more divided by the total number of employees.more divided by the total number of employees.

FOCUS LEVEL: ANCOR DSP Stability Rate

Numerator 41,951

Denominator 63,027

2010 Benchmark Stability Rate 66.6%

Calculations from Assessing Retention Outcomes; Sheryl Larson (June 13, 2000)


Percentage66.6%

64.6%

62.9%

61.0%

62.0%

63.0%

64.0%

65.0%

66.0%

67.0%

2008 2009 2010

Years

Stability Annual ComparisonsStability Annual Comparisons

4.18

4.08

4.10

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00




Employee Satisfaction & Stability


64.6%

66.6%

62.9%

3.91

3.77

3.75

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00





Employee Satisfaction & Stability


64.6%

66.6%

62.9%

• No significant relationship between No significant relationship between employee satisfaction compared with employee satisfaction compared with stability in 2009 and 2008.stability in 2009 and 2008.


Stability: 66.6%Stability: 66.6%

Stability Noteworthy FindingsStability Noteworthy Findings

• Overall stability increased in 2010 Overall stability increased in 2010 (66.6%), when compared with the results (66.6%), when compared with the results from 2009 (62.9%) and 2008 (64.6%).from 2009 (62.9%) and 2008 (64.6%).


DSP RETENTION RATEDSP RETENTION RATEThe tenure rate for direct service professionals is one way to measure The tenure rate for direct service professionals is one way to measure retention for an organization. This metric reports in terms of months. Add retention for an organization. This metric reports in terms of months. Add the number of months each employee has worked for the organization and the number of months each employee has worked for the organization and divide by the total number of employees. This will give an organizationdivide by the total number of employees. This will give an organizationthe average number of months employees have worked at this the average number of months employees have worked at this organization.organization.

FOCUS LEVEL: ANCOR DSP Retention Rate

Numerator 3,334,944

Denominator 74,210

2010 Benchmark Retention Rate 44.93 Months

Calculations from Assessing Retention Outcomes; Sheryl Larson (June 13, 2000)\


44.9

3837.8

34363840424446

2008 2009 2010

Years

Mo

nth

sRetention Annual ComparisonsRetention Annual Comparisons

4.18

4.08

4.10

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00




Employee Satisfaction & Retention


38.0 months

44.9 months

37.8 months

3.91

3.77

3.75

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00





Employee Satisfaction & Retention


38.0 months

44.9 months

37.8 months

• Overall retention increased in 2009 (44.9 Overall retention increased in 2009 (44.9 months), when compared with the results months), when compared with the results from 2009 (37.8 months) and 2008 (38.0).from 2009 (37.8 months) and 2008 (38.0).

• No significant relationship between No significant relationship between employee satisfaction compared with employee satisfaction compared with retention in 2009 and 2008.retention in 2009 and 2008.


Retention: 44.9 monthsRetention: 44.9 months

Retention Noteworthy FindingsRetention Noteworthy Findings

Employee SatisfactionEmployee Satisfaction

• Overall, these are the Overall, these are the top five items that top five items that have the greatest have the greatest influence in overall influence in overall employee employee satisfaction.satisfaction.

• Overall, employees Overall, employees take pride in their take pride in their work and that work and that contributes the contributes the greatest to their greatest to their overall satisfaction overall satisfaction with their job.with their job.

• Leadership and Leadership and supervisors also supervisors also impact overall impact overall satisfaction for satisfaction for employees.employees.

I take pride in my workI take pride in my work

Have proper equipment, supplies, materials necessaryHave proper equipment, supplies, materials necessary

Leadership gives employee satisfaction a high priorityLeadership gives employee satisfaction a high priority

Supervisor maintains open line of communicationSupervisor maintains open line of communication

Supervisor gives me recognition for the work I doSupervisor gives me recognition for the work I do

3.933.93

4.574.57

3.873.87

3.943.94

3.473.47

Overall Satisfaction: 4.08 (81.6% answered 4 or 5)Overall Satisfaction: 4.08 (81.6% answered 4 or 5)

AVG. SCOREAVG. SCORE TOP 2 (4+5)TOP 2 (4+5)IMPACT RANKIMPACT RANK

1

2

3

4

5

DRIVERDRIVER

1

2

34

5

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

4.75

5.00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LOWEST IMPACTLOWEST IMPACT MODERATE IMPACTMODERATE IMPACT HIGHEST IMPACTHIGHEST IMPACT

Relative Impact Rank (based on indexed Beta)Relative Impact Rank (based on indexed Beta)

““Impact Rank” is based on a “Beta” generated by the Multivariate Regression Analysis. Impact Rank” is based on a “Beta” generated by the Multivariate Regression Analysis.

Drivers are ranked relative to the most influential (Rank 1) factor.Drivers are ranked relative to the most influential (Rank 1) factor.

77.9%77.9%

95.6%95.6%

72.6%72.6%

75.7%75.7%

56.6%56.6%


Person Receiving ServicesPerson Receiving Services

Choice & Self-Direction FindingsChoice & Self-Direction Findings

3.754.16 4.11

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhere loved one lives?

n = 639 n = 582 n = 685

4.14 4.30 4.20

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhere loved one goes in free time?

n = 688 n = 606 n = 684

4.03 4.29 4.17

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWho loved one spends free time with?

n = 611 n = 606 n = 613

3.344.04 3.98

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWho loved one lives with?

n = 587 n = 589 n = 599

4.15 4.29 4.19

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhat loved one does in free time?

n = 685 n = 605 n = 684

3.794.14 4.09

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISStaff who supports loved one?

n = 600 n = 600 n = 597

HOW MUCH CHOICE?

IMPORTANCE OF CHOICE?

SATISFIED WITH CHOICE?

Family / GuardianFamily / GuardianChoice & Self-Direction FindingsChoice & Self-Direction Findings

3.013.79

4.30

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhere loved one lives?

n = 1569 n = 1447 n = 1508

3.273.96 4.13

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhere loved one goes in free time?

n = 1567n = 1486 n = 1475

3.274.02 4.17

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWho loved one spends free time with?

n = 1574 n = 1495 n = 1558

2.80

3.864.21

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWho loved one lives with?

n = 1518 n = 1432 n = 1574

3.394.10 4.13

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISWhat loved one does in free time?

n = 1581 n = 1636 n = 1484

3.10

3.99 4.18

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.503.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

Dept. CA or IS Total All KCA/ISStaff who supports loved one?

n = 1452 n = 1402 n = 1412

HOW MUCH CHOICE?

IMPORTANCE OF CHOICE?

SATISFIED WITH CHOICE?


*2010 Unemployment Rates*2010 Unemployment Rates

7.39.1

9.6

12.5

11.9

9.6

9.3

7.48.8

4.9

4.2

6.5

6.7

5.6

8.0

7.3

6.0

8.9

7.7

8.19.3

10.8

9.9

9.79.6

10.0 6.18.8

10.2

8.7 8.28.6

7.6

CT: 9.1

NJ: 9.3DE: 8.2

7.9

7.5

7.6

* Bureau of Labor Statistics; www.bls.gov/web/laumstrk.htm

3.3

MD: 6.8

6.0

AK: 7.3

10.4

9.8

RI: 10.9MA: 7.8

HI: 6.1

DC: 9.6

NH: 4.9

VT: 5.3

• No significant relationship between No significant relationship between satisfaction (employee & consumer & satisfaction (employee & consumer & family/guardian) compared with family/guardian) compared with unemployment in 2009 and 2008.unemployment in 2009 and 2008.


UnemploymentUnemployment

Unemployment Noteworthy FindingsUnemployment Noteworthy Findings

• No significant relationship between DSP No significant relationship between DSP rates / employee satisfaction compared rates / employee satisfaction compared with unemployment in 2009 and 2008.with unemployment in 2009 and 2008.

What Next?Generate Your Reports!Generate Your Reports!

https://secure.deyta.com/PET/Login.aspx

• Currently within PET there are three reports available for each metric. Every report is generated for one individual metric.

• Agency Overall Report

• Location Report

• Profile Specific Report

What Next?

• Review Your Data!Review Your Data!

• Powerpoint available: Powerpoint available: www.ancor.org

• Identify Top ProvidersIdentify Top Providers

• Determine Best PracticesDetermine Best Practices

• Next StepsNext Steps

• Update from ANCORUpdate from ANCOR

http://www.ancor.org/

Thank-You!Thank-You!

Contact Information: Contact Information:

Rebecca Guess Rebecca Guess [email protected]

DEYTADEYTA

502.379.6179502.379.6179

Debra Langseth Debra Langseth [email protected]

ANCORANCOR

703.535.7850 ext: 15703.535.7850 ext: 15

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Performance Excellence Initiative 2010 Facts & Figures: Benchmark Data

Documents

Transcript of Performance Excellence Initiative 2010 Facts & Figures: Benchmark Data