Search results

Showing 1 – 5 of 5 results.
Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Better Jobs Better Care: Clinical Manager Survey, 2004-2007 [Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Vermont] (ICPSR 29063)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Iowa, United States, Pennsylvania
Time period: 2004-01-01--2007-01-01

Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Atlantic Philanthropies, Better Jobs Better Care (BJBC) was a demonstration program that sought to bring about changes in public policy and management practice that would lead to improved recruitment and retention of high-quality paraprofessional direct care workers (DCW) in nursing homes as well as in home- and community-based settings. This was to be accomplished by implementing both policy and management practice goals. Policy goals included developing initiatives related to wages and benefits, incentives for job redesign, curriculum and credentialing, professional associations, and promotion of public awareness and policies. Practice goals involved interventions related to caregiving skill development, peer mentoring, team building, top management training, supervisor training, and provider-specific interventions. The program established demonstration projects in Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Vermont which enrolled long-term care establishments across the spectrum of long-term care settings: skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, home care agencies, and adult day service providers.

Conducted as part of the BJBC evaluation, which used a before-after design to assess the implementation of the interventions and their impact, this survey of the top clinical manager at each participating long-term care provider explored the establishments' organizational characteristics and management practices. One version of the survey was administered at the beginning of the demonstration (Time1), and a second version, toward the end of the demonstration (Time 2). Organizational characteristics covered by the survey include nonprofit/for-profit status, whether the establishment was free standing or part of a chain, number of competing establishments, whether the DCWs were unionized, and the type and amount of services provided. Management practices investigated by the survey include participation in care planning, communication about tasks, feedback, DCW training, management communication, organizational readiness for change, professional development, and work design practices. The survey also collected information about the racial and Hispanic origin composition of DCWs and patients/residents/clients.

Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Better Jobs Better Care: Direct Care Worker Survey, 2004-2007 [Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont] (ICPSR 29064)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Iowa, United States, Pennsylvania
Time period: 2004-01-01--2007-01-01

Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Atlantic Philanthropies, Better Jobs Better Care (BJBC) was a demonstration program that sought to bring about changes in public policy and management practice that would lead to improved recruitment and retention of high-quality paraprofessional direct care workers (DCW) in nursing homes as well as in home- and community-based settings. This was to be accomplished by implementing both policy and management practice goals. Policy goals included developing initiatives related to wages and benefits, incentives for job redesign, curriculum and credentialing, professional associations, and promotion of public awareness and policies. Practice goals involved interventions related to caregiving skill development, peer mentoring, team building, top management training, supervisor training, and provider-specific interventions. The program established demonstration projects in Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Vermont which enrolled long-term care establishments across the spectrum of long-term care settings: skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, home care agencies, and adult day service providers.

Conducted as part of the BJBC evaluation, this survey interviewed DCWs at two points during the demonstration. The Time 1 interview was fielded as soon as establishments enrolled in the demonstration and provided a list of their DCWs (July 2004 to December 2006), and the Time 2 interviews were completed 12 to 28 months after the Time 1 interviews (April 2006 to June 2007). Both rounds of the survey used the same self-administered questionnaire which included questions about length of employment, job satisfaction, job rewards and problems, supervision, perceptions of quality of care, job confidence, training, intent to quit, and demographic characteristics. The survey also elicited recommendations for improving DCWs' jobs by asking the open-ended question "What is the single most important thing your employer could do to improve your job as a direct care worker?"

Curated
Partially restricted

Evaluation of Better Jobs, Better Care: Frontline Supervisor Survey, 2005-2007 [Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont] (ICPSR 23000)

Released/updated on: 2008-09-26
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, Iowa, United States, Pennsylvania
Time period: 2005-01-01--2007-01-01

In long-term care, frontline supervisors play a central role in direct care workers' (DCW) job quality and turnover and are critical to the implementation of management changes. To better understand supervisors' perceptions of management practices, the quality of supervision, and the effect on DCW turnover and job quality, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the United States Department of Health and Human Services contracted with Pennsylvania State University to conduct this survey of supervisors participating in the Better Jobs, Better Care (BJBC) demonstration. Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Atlantic Philanthropies, the BJBC demonstration -- which took place in Iowa, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Vermont -- tested innovative policy and practice models designed to improve the quality of DCW jobs in an effort to improve recruitment and retention of these workers and strengthen capacity to meet future demand for long-term care.

Frontline supervisors were interviewed from the four types of facilities and agencies that participated in the demonstration: skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, home care agencies, and adult day service providers. The survey explored the supervisors' job responsibilities, formal training, job satisfaction, and thoughts about quitting. It investigated the culture of the organizations in which the supervisors worked, probed for problems with the supervisors' jobs, assessed how rewarding the supervisors felt their jobs were, inquired as to whether the supervisors felt respected by their clients, DCWs, and managers, gauged the supervisors' assessments of the overall competency level of the DCWs in their organizations, and explored the supervisors' beliefs about managerial support for the BJBC project, how well the BJBC programs were executed, and whether the overall impact of the project was positive.

In addition, the respondents were queried about management practices (e.g., rotation of assignments to different services or units, mechanisms to handle employee concerns, and approaches used to handle poor performance or negative behaviors among employees). They were also asked about DCW training, mentoring, and career ladder programs, DCW participation in patient/resident/client care plans, and communication among DCWs and between DCWs and their supervisors. Respondents were also asked what was the most important thing that their employer could do both to improve the jobs of DCWs and to improve their own ability to do their jobs as supervisors of DCWs. Additional information collected by the survey includes the supervisors' age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, educational attainment, nursing degree or license (LPN, RN, Diploma RN, BSN, MSN, or Advanced Practice Nurse), wages, and health insurance coverage.

This collection comprises three data files: (1) Supervisor Identification Instrument Data, (2) Supervisor Survey Data, and (3) Clinical Managers Who Are Also Supervisors Data. The first file contains information collected by the Supervisor Identification Instrument that was submitted to the clinical manager at each BJBC provider organization. This instrument instructed clinical managers to name all of the supervisors in their organization and to indicate which supervisory responsibilities each one performed. The second data file contains the responses to the Supervisor Survey questionnaire.The third data file contains the responses of clinical managers who also functioned as supervisors in their organization. These clinical managers responded to the same questions in the Supervisor Survey questionnaire, except for ten questions that were worded somewhat differently.

Curated
Partially restricted

Massachusetts Nursing Profession Entrants Survey, 1988 (ICPSR 9520)

Released/updated on: 2024-02-14
Geographic coverage: United States
The purpose of this survey was to gather information to assist educators, administrators, and policymakers in the development of strategies for the recruitment and retention of registered nurses. To that end, nurses taking the Massachusetts licensure exam were queried about their reasons for going into nursing, their nursing career goals, their attitudes toward the nursing profession, their preferences for various branches of the nursing profession, and the importance they placed on various aspects of work in general, e.g., job security, high income, and good opportunities for advancement. Respondents were also questioned about their job searches and their current or impending jobs: how the job was found, number of applications filled out and offers received, number of hours usually worked, earnings, type of medical facility, shift usually worked and preferred, commuting distances, public transportation and child care needs, whether student clinical experience was obtained with the employer, planned length of stay at the job, and the importance of various factors that attracted them to the position, such as the attractiveness of the town or city where the job was located, salary and benefit levels, availability of parking and child care, and job flexibility. In addition, the survey asked respondents how and when they decided to become nurses, how they found out about educational options in nursing, how much basic nursing education they received and how it was financed, which factors attracted them to the schools from which they graduated, and how much of their basic nursing education was devoted to clinical experience. Background information on respondents includes age, sex, citizenship, race, ethnic group, marital status, education, education goals, family income, number and ages of related persons living in the household, usage of child care and elderly care services, parents' education and occupations, and mother's employment status at various stages of the respondent's childhood and adolescence.
Curated

National Studies of Physicians from Twenty-four Medical and Surgical Specialties, 1976-1978 (ICPSR 7782)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-18
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1976-01-01--1978-01-01
This study was conducted in order to gather detailed specialty-specific data for most of the physician population of the United States. Each member of sample groups of physicians in each of 24 specialty areas completed numerically coded "log diaries" (self-enumerated questionnaires) over the course of one week during the survey data gathering period of 1976-1978. With the information obtained from the log diaries, three data files containing detailed information on the activities of the physicians surveyed and on the characteristics of their practices were prepared for each of the 24 specialty areas: allergy, cardiology, dermatology, emergency medicine, endocrinology, family practice, gastroenterology, general practice, general surgery, hematology, infectious diseases, internal medicine, nephrology, neurological surgery, neurology, obstetrics/gynecology, oncology, ophthalmology, orthopaedic surgery, otorhinolaryngology, pediatrics, psychiatry, pulmonary diseases, and rheumatology. As a result, there are 71 discrete datafiles in this dataset (emergency medicine has only two files). Parts 1-24 contain detailed information about each physician's medical or surgical practice, e.g., specialty, major professional activity, board certifications, type of practice, physician's opinion concerning distribution of specialties in the community, number of hours per week worked and in what capacity, and type of employees in physician's practice and number of hours worked. Parts 28-48 contain data on each patient the physician saw in person during the week in which he or she kept the log diary. Parts 49-71 hold the data derived from each encounter the physician had via telephone with a patient during the same period. The data in the latter two groups of files contain patient age, sex, problem focus, role, source, and diagnoses.