Public Health Emergency Preparedness - Kansas … · Web viewUpdate state healthcare-acquired...

Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Cooperative Agreement

Ebola Preparedness and Response

Performance Measure Guidance

April 1, 2015 - September 30, 2016

Version 2.0

Table of ContentsIntroduction

Overview of the Ebola Performance Measures

Document OrganizationEPR Performance Measure 1:...................................................................................................................5

Community Preparedness – Healthcare Acquired Infections

EPR Performance Measure 2:...................................................................................................................6

Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Monitoring Exposed Individuals


Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Lost to Follow-up


Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Close Contact Investigations

EPR Performance Measure 5:.................................................................................................................10

Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Decon/Environmental Cleaning


Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Waste Management


Medical Surge – EMS Transport


Public Health Laboratory Testing – Sentinel Clinical Lab Packaging and Shipping Preparedness


Public Health Laboratory Testing – Public Health Lab Staff Certification for Packaging and Shipping

EPR Performance Measure 10:...............................................................................................................18

Public Health Laboratory Testing – Laboratorian Ebola Testing Competence

EPR Performance Measure 11:...............................................................................................................19

Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Isolation and Quarantine

Data Collection Timeline...............................................................................................................................21

2

IntroductionDomestic Ebola preparedness is a top CDC priority. CDC has awarded $145 million in supplemental funding to the current 62 Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) cooperative agreement awardees to support preparedness planning and operational readiness for responding to Ebola.

Funds are intended to: Support accelerated public health preparedness planning for Ebola within state, local, territorial, and

tribal public health systems. Improve and assure operational readiness for Ebola and support state, local, territorial, and tribal Ebola

public health response efforts. Assure collaboration, coordination, and partnership with the jurisdiction’s healthcare system to assist in

the development of a tiered system for Ebola patient care. Strengthen existing partnerships public health preparedness programs have built with healthcare,

epidemiology, and laboratory colleagues in their jurisdictions. Establish new partnerships with infection control programs in their jurisdictions to advance the

development of stronger healthcare system infection control programs.

PHEP supplemental funding targets the accelerated development of public health preparedness capabilities needed to prepare for Ebola. These include:

Capability 1 - Community Preparedness; Capability 4 - Emergency Public Information and Warning / Capability 6 - Information Sharing; Capability 10 - Medical Surge; Capability 11 - Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions; Capability 12 - Public Health Laboratory Testing; Capability 13 - Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation; and Capability 14 - Responder Safety and Health.

Overview of the Ebola Performance Measures (EPR)This document contains 11 supplemental performance measures. Four of these measures are specific to the PHEP program and will be collected by the Division of State and Local Readiness (DSLR). The four measures relate to specific activities outlined in the Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) and Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) Cooperative Agreements / PHEP Supplemental for Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities, CDC-RFA-TP12-12010302SUPP15.

The remaining seven are joint performance measures that were developed in collaboration with three other CDC programs. These programs will collect and share data associated with these joint measures as indicated in the descriptions of the measures. The other programs include the Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion (DHQP); the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine (DGMQ); and the Division of Preparedness and Emerging Infections (DPEI). The joint measures relate to activities outlined in the Domestic Ebola Supplement to Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases (ELC) - Building and Strengthening Epidemiology, Laboratory and Health Information Systems Capacity in State and Local Health Departments, CK14-1401PPHFSUPP15. The ELC supplement covers three separate, but related, projects: (1) Healthcare Infection Control Assessment and Response, (2) Laboratory Biosafety, and (3) Global Migration, Border Interventions,

3

and Migrant Health. Building on the success of current PHEP and ELC joint measures, these new Ebola joint measures ensure accountability for key activities related to Ebola preparedness and response while also ensuring data collection efforts are not duplicative across CDC-funded programs.

The PHEP Ebola performance measures include two types of measures: Accountability measures to assess which awardees are completing key planning and training activities

described in the PHEP Ebola supplemental guidance and Performance measures to assess how well a given activity or function is being performed.

As required in the PHEP Supplemental for Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities guidance, all awardees are required to report baseline and follow-up data via PERFORMS and other required reporting mechanisms. Awardees must submit baseline data on select performance measures in May 2015, along with follow-up data collection as part of routine progress reporting. Points-in-time data should be collected (collection months) and the time data should be reported into PERFORMS (reporting months) for each of the EPR performance measures as listed on the following pages of this guidance document.

Document OrganizationThis guidance document provides the following information:

a brief description of each performance measure including the indicator; the capability to which the measure aligns; type of measure; whether it is a joint measure; which CDC division(s) collects the measure; who is required to report; months in which data will be reported in PERFORMS1; targets for reporting when applicable; clarifying comments; and data elements to be collected.

1 See the Data Collection Table on page 18 for the collection months for each of the performance measures.4

EPR Performance Measure 1: Community Preparedness – Healthcare-Acquired Infections

Measure/Indicator Update state healthcare-acquired infections (HAI) action plan to include strategies for assessing gaps in infection control practices and outbreak reporting; assure relevant partners are added to the state HAI advisory group, including appropriate representation from preparedness partners

Public health preparedness capability alignment

Community Preparedness

Type AccountabilityJoint measure Yes. PHEP/ELC/Healthcare Infection Control Collector DHQPMeasure applies to 50 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto RicoReporting months Oct 2015, April 2016, Oct 2016Data elements template (PERFORMS format)

1. Has your state HAI action plan been updated to include strategies for assessing infection control practices, detecting infection control gaps, and improving outbreak reporting activities? [Yes/No]

a. When was this plan updated to include activities in question 1? [Max 25 characters]

2. Have relevant partners, including appropriate representation from preparedness partners, been added to the state HAI advisory group? [Yes/No/Preparedness already part of HAI Advisory group]

a. When was this plan updated to include activities in question 2? [Max 25 characters]

Information populated by DHQP. Please contact DHQP to correct any information provided to DSLR.

5

EPR Performance Measure 2: Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Monitoring Exposed Individuals

Measure/indicator Percentage of potentially exposed individuals who are successfully* monitored while in the jurisdiction

*Note. Successful monitoring is defined as making contact with the monitored person with no gaps in reporting of more than 48 hours (for either AM or DAM)


Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation

Type PerformanceJoint measure Yes. PHEP/ELC/Global MigrationCollector DSLRMeasure applies to 60 PHEP awardees (All except Los Angeles County and Chicago)Reporting months Baseline: (Collect from October 1, 2014 – March 31, 2015), to report in May 2015

Subsequently, every 3 months starting with the period beginning April 1: July 2015, October 2015, January 2016, April 2016, July 2016, October 2016

Target >=95%Data elements template (PERFORMS format)

1. Number of potentially exposed individuals in the jurisdiction (denominator). [Max 4 digits]

2. Number of potentially exposed individuals who were successfully monitored every day while in the jurisdiction (numerator). [Max 4 digits]

3. Percentage of potentially exposed individuals who were monitored every day while in the jurisdiction. [System Calculation]

4. Number of potentially exposed individuals under monitoring who are “lost to follow-up” (LTF) for more than 48 hours. [Max 4 digits]

NOTE: The performance measure is calculated using question #1 and question #4.

(Question #1 – Question #4) /Question #1

6

EPR Performance Measure 3: Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Lost to Follow-up

Measure/indicator Are plans, policies, and procedures meeting all stated criteria in place in the jurisdiction to (re) establish contact with an individual lost-to-follow up (LTF) or who cannot be reached (including refusal to report)?



Type AccountabilityJoint measure NoCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Data elements template(PERFORMS format)

1. Are plans, policies, and/or procedures meeting all stated criteria in place in the jurisdiction to (re) establish contact with an individual LTF or who cannot be reached (including refusal to report)? Please select plans, policies, and/or procedures that are in place. (Select all that apply):

Criteria are defined for individuals considered (1) unable to be initially contacted and (2) LTF, that is within 48 hours

Staff are identified and responsible for outreach to individuals who are unable to be initially contacted or who are LTF for more than 48 hours

A timeline for outreach efforts for individuals unable to be initially contacted or who are LTF

Identification of agencies outside the health department to assist with individuals unable to be initially contacted or LTF (e.g., law enforcement)

A requirement to contact CDC regarding individuals LTF for more than 48 hours and specific steps describing how to do so

No plans/policies/procedures are currently in place (but it is a jurisdictional responsibility)

Development of plans/policies/procedures are not the responsibility of the jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of local entities)

a. When were plans, policies, and procedures (meeting all criteria above) put in place? Date [MM/YYYY] [Displays in PERFORMS once all items selected as complete]

a(i). Is the above date correct? [Yes/No]

7

2. For states: Do any local health departments (LHDs) have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]

*Directly funded localities, states or U.S. territories without LHDs, and freely associated states select “Not applicable.”

a. If yes to #2, Do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that LHDs have initiated and completed the activities in Question 1? [Yes/No]b. If yes to #2, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for activities in Question 1 have completed it. (None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all)

8

EPR Performance Measure 4: Public Health Surveillance and Epidemiological Investigation – Close Contact Investigations

Measure/indicator Are plans, policies, and/or procedures meeting all stated criteria in place in the jurisdiction to investigate close contacts of lab-confirmed (EVD-positive) cases and, if desired by the jurisdiction, other categories of individuals such as PUIs?



Type AccountabilityJoint measure NoCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Data elements template(PERFORMS format)

1. Are plans, policies, and/or procedures meeting all stated criteria in place in the jurisdiction to investigate close contacts of lab-confirmed (EVD-positive) cases and, if desired by the jurisdiction, other categories of individuals such as PUIs? Please select plans, policies, or procedures that are in place (Select all that apply):

A definition of close contacts, lab-confirmed cases of individuals with EVD, and (if desired by the jurisdiction) other relevant terms, categories and case definitions (e.g., PUIs)

Staff are identified to conduct contact investigation A timeline for a contact investigation to start Interview template(s) for contacts No plans/policies/procedures are currently in place (but it is a jurisdictional

responsibility) Development of plans/policies/procedures are not the responsibility of the

jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of local entities)

a. When were plans, policies, and/or procedures (meeting all criteria above) put in place? Date [MM/YYYY] [Displays in PERFORMS once all items selected as complete]

a(i). Is the above date correct? [Yes/No]

2. For states: Do any LHDs have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]


a. If yes to #2, Do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that LHDs have initiated and completed the activity in Question 1? [Yes/No]b. If yes to #2, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for activity in Question 1 have completed it. (None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all)

9

EPR Performance Measure 5: Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Decontamination/Environmental Cleaning

Measure/indicator Are policies, plans, procedures and, as applicable, agreements in place to assure, provide or support decontamination / environmental cleaning in community settings in the jurisdiction?

PHEP Capability Alignments

Community Preparedness; Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions

Type AccountabilityJoint Measure Yes. PHEP/Global MigrationCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesCollection months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Data elements template (PERFORMS format)

1. Are plans, policies, and/or procedures and as applicable, agreements (e.g., MOUs, contracts) in place to assure, provide or support decontamination / environmental cleaning in community settings in the jurisdiction?

Yes No but it is a jurisdictional responsibility Not the responsibility of the jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of

local entities)

a. When were these plans, policies, and/or procedures and, as applicable, agreements put in place? [MM/YYYY]

a(i). Is the above correct? [Yes/No]

b. Do these policies, plans, procedures and, as applicable, agreements cover ports of entry in your jurisdiction?

Yes No but it is a jurisdictional responsibility No ports requiring plans/ landlocked state Not the responsibility of the jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of

local entities)

2. For states: Do any local health departments (LHDs) have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]


a. If yes to #2, Do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that LHDs have initiated and completed the activity in Question 1? [Yes/No]

10

Measure/indicator Are policies, plans, procedures and, as applicable, agreements in place to assure, provide or support decontamination / environmental cleaning in community settings in the jurisdiction?

b. If yes to #2, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for activity in Question 1 have completed it. (None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all)

11

EPR Performance Measure 6: Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Waste Management

Measure/indicator Are policies, plans, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements in place to assure, provide, or support waste management in community settings in the jurisdiction?


Community Preparedness; Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions

Type AccountabilityJoint Measure Yes. PHEP/Global MigrationCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Comments This measure is not intended to cover waste management planning activities,

equipment purchases, and practices within or for healthcare facilities covered by ASPR FOA EP-U3R-15-002 (Hospital Preparedness Program [HPP] Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities).

Data elements template (PERFORMS format)

1. Are plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements in place to assure, provide, or support waste management in community settings in the jurisdiction?

Yes No but it is a jurisdictional responsibility Not the responsibility of the jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of

local entities)

a. When were these plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements put in place? [MM/YYYY]

a(i). Is the above correct? [Yes/No]

b. Do these plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements cover ports of entry in your jurisdiction?

Yes No but it is a jurisdictional responsibility No ports requiring plans/ landlocked state Not the responsibility of the jurisdiction (](e.g., solely the responsibility

of local entities)

2. For states: Do any LHDs have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]


a. If yes to #2, Do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that LHDs have initiated and completed the activity in Question 1?

12

Measure/indicator Are policies, plans, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements in place to assure, provide, or support waste management in community settings in the jurisdiction?

[Yes/No]

b. If yes to #2, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for activity in Question 1 have completed it. (None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all)

13

EPR Performance Measure 7: Medical Surge – Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Transport

Measure/indicator Are plans, policies, procedures, and agreements in place with EMS or other ambulance providers, LHDs(as applicable), and other identified partners, regarding notification (to the health department), ambulance dispatch, and transport of (a) PUIs and other potentially exposed individuals requiring assessment and (b) confirmed cases of Ebola to assessment hospital(s), treatment center(s), and, as applicable, frontline hospitals?

Within the jurisdiction Across state or other jurisdictional lines As applicable, from ports of entry (must include relevant port partners)


Community Preparedness, Medical Surge

Type Accountability/systemJoint measure Yes. PHEP/Global MigrationCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesReporting months Baseline: May 2015


1. Are plans, policies, procedures, and agreements in place with EMS or other ambulance providers, local health departments (as applicable), and other identified partners, regarding notification (to the health department), ambulance dispatch, and transport of (a) PUIs and other potentially exposed individuals requiring assessment and (b) confirmed cases of Ebola to assessment hospital(s) and treatment center(s)?[Select all that apply]

Within the jurisdiction [answer a] Across state or other jurisdictional lines [answer b] As applicable, from ports of entry (must include relevant port partners)

[answer c] No plans/policies/procedures are currently in place (but it is a jurisdictional

responsibility) Development of plans/policies/procedures are not the responsibility of the

jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of local entities)

a. When were policies, plans and, procedures applicable within the jurisdiction put in place? [MM/YYYY]

a(i) Is the above date correct for when policies, plans and procedures applicable within the jurisdiction put in place? [Yes/No]

b. When were policies, plans, and procedures applicable for transportation across state/jurisdictional lines put in place? [MM/YYYY]

b(i). Is the above date correct for when policies, plans and procedures across state/jurisdictional lines put in place? [Yes/No]

14

c. When were policies, plans, and procedures with ports of entry put in place? [MM/YYYY]

c(i). Is the above date correct for when policies, plans, and procedures applicable with ports of entry put in place? [Yes/No]

2. Although not explicitly required, has the awardee led or participated in an exercise of these plans? [Yes/No]

a. If yes to #2: Did a port of entry participate in this exercise? [Yes/No]b. If yes to #2: Has an After Action Report (AAR) been completed? [Yes/No]c. If yes to #2: Have improvement plan items been identified? [Yes/No]d. If yes to #2c: To what extent have improvement plan items been completed?

[Not started, some completed, most completed, all completed]

3. For states, do any LHDs have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]


a. If yes to #3, do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure that LHDs have initiated and completed the activity in Question 1? [Yes/No]

b. If yes to #3, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for this activity in Question 1 have completed it [None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all]

15

EPR Performance Measure 8: Public Health Laboratory Testing – Sentinel Clinical Lab Packaging and Shipping Preparedness

Measure/indicator Number and percentage of sentinel clinical labs in which at least two staff members are currently certified in packaging/shipping of IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances


Public Health Laboratory Testing

Type AccountabilityJoint measure Yes, PHEP/ELCCollector DPEIMeasure applies to Applies to 50 states, New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles County, and

Puerto RicoReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Comments Inclusion criteria for numerator includes non-lab staff members (e.g., shipping or

dock staff) certified to package/shipAwardees encouraged to prioritize ETC and assessment hospital labs.

Contact list of sentinel clinical labs (i.e., denominator) should be kept by public health laboratory (PHL), per PHEP guidance

Sentinel clinical laboratoryEbola Treatment Centers (ETC)Ebola Assessment HospitalsFrontline Hospitals

Click on each for their CDC web page links. The link will open the web page in a separate window for you to review.


1. Number of sentinel clinical labs in which at least two staff members are currently certified in safe packaging/shipping of International Air Transport Association (IATA) division 6.2 Category A infectious substances [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

a. Of this number, how many are part of ETC or assessment hospitals in your jurisdiction? [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

2. Total number of sentinel clinical laboratories in the jurisdiction [Max 3 digits]a. Of this number, how many are part of ETC or assessment hospitals in your

jurisdiction? [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

3. Percentage of sentinel clinical labs in which at least two staff members are currently certified in packaging/shipping of IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

Please contact ELC program office to correct any information provided to DSLR.

16

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/healthcare-us/preparing/frontline-healthcare-facilities.html

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/healthcare-us/preparing/assessment-hospitals.html

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/healthcare-us/preparing/treatment-centers.html

http://www.aphl.org/aphlprograms/preparedness-and-response/partnerships-and-outreach/Documents/PHPR_2013Nov_Sentinel-Laboratory-Definition.pdf

EPR Performance Measure 9: Public Health Laboratory Testing – Public Health Lab Staff Certification for Packaging and Shipping

Measure/indicator Number and percentage of public health laboratorians needed to package / ship IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances who are currently certified to do so



Type AccountabilityJoint measure Yes. ELC/PHEPCollector DPEIMeasure applies to 50 states, New York City, District of Columbia, Los Angeles City, and Puerto RicoReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 6 months: October 2015, April 2016, October 2016Target 100%Data elements template (PERFORMS format)

1. Number of laboratorians needed to package / ship IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances (denominator) [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

2. Number of laboratorians currently certified in packaging/shipping IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances (Numerator) [Max 3 digits] Populated by ELC.

3. Percentage of needed certified laboratorians available to pack/ship IATA division 6.2 Category A infectious substances. [System Calculation]

Please contact ELC program office to correct any information provided to DSLR.

17

EPR Performance Measure 10: Public Health Laboratory Testing – Laboratorian Ebola Testing Competency

Measure/indicator Percentage of laboratorians identified to perform Ebola testing who have demonstrated competency in performance of LRN-distributed Ebola testing

PHEP Capability Alignment


Type AccountabilityJoint measure NoCollector DSLRMeasure applies to 50 states, New York City, District of Columbia, Los Angeles CityReporting months Baseline: May 2015

Every 3 months: July 2015, October 2015, January 2016, April 2016, July 2016, October 2016


1. Total number of laboratorians needed by jurisdiction to demonstrate competence in LRN- distributed Ebola PCR testing based on laboratory risk assessment (Denominator) [Max 3 digits]

2. Number of laboratorians who demonstrate competency in LRN-distributed Ebola PCR testing (Numerator) [Max 3 digits]

3. Percentage of laboratorians identified to perform Ebola testing who have demonstrated competency in performance of LRN-distributed Ebola PCR testing [System Calculation]

18

EPR Performance Measure 11: Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions – Isolation and Quarantine

Measure/indicator Are plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements in place with judicial/legal authorities and law enforcement agencies related to the issuance and enforcement of public health orders that restrict or control movement or place an individual into isolation or quarantine in the jurisdiction?


Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions

Type AccountabilityJoint Measure NoCollector DSLRMeasure applies to All PHEP awardeesReporting months Baseline: May 2015


1. Are plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements in place with the following entities related to the issuance and enforcement of public health orders that restrict or control movement or place an individual into isolation or quarantine in the jurisdiction? [Check all that apply]

Judicial/legal authorities such as office of general counsel, legal departments in agencies, and/or courts [answer a, b]

Law enforcement agencies [answer c] No plans/policies/procedures are currently in place (but it is a

jurisdictional responsibility) Development of plans/policies/procedures are not the responsibility of

the jurisdiction (e.g., solely the responsibility of local entities)

a. Do plans, policies, procedures, and, as applicable, agreements contain provisions to assure housing for individuals under quarantine or other monitored individuals as required by the jurisdiction? [Yes/No]

b. When were policies, plans, and procedures related to issuance of public health orders put in place with (e.g., reviewed or approved by) legal counsel, authorities and/or the courts? [MM/YYYY]

b(i). Is the above date correct? [Yes/No]

c. When were policies, plans, and procedures related to enforcement of public health orders by law enforcement put in place? [MM/YYYY]

c(i). Is the above date correct? [Yes/No]

2. For states, do any LHDs have responsibility for the activity in Question 1*? [Yes/No/Not applicable]


a. If yes to #2, do you have an oversight/monitoring mechanism in place to ensure

19

that LHDs have initiated and completed the activity in Question 1? [Yes/No]

b. If yes to #2, estimate how many LHDs in your jurisdiction with responsibility for this activity in Question 1 have completed it. [None; less than 50%; 50% or more, all]

20

Data Collection Timeline

EPR Performance Measures Collected Reporting MonthMore specific information on PERFORMS reporting time frames will be announced later.

EPR Performance Measure 2 (baseline) May 2015

EPR Performance Measures: 1, 3-11 (baseline if indicated)

Varies

EPR Performance Measures: 2, 10 July 2015

EPR Performance Measures: All measures October 2015

EPR Performance Measures: 2, 10 January 2016

EPR Performance Measures: All measures April 2016

EPR Performance Measures: 2, 10 July 2016

EPR Performance Measures: All measures October 2016

21

Public Health Emergency Preparedness - Kansas … · Web viewUpdate state healthcare-acquired...

Documents

Transcript of Public Health Emergency Preparedness - Kansas … · Web viewUpdate state healthcare-acquired...