Interorganizational Context When Implementing Multisector Partnered Programs: A Qualitative Analysis of Veteran Directed Care.

As the number of Veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and at risk for needing Long Term Services and Supports increases, VHA is shifting from institutional to Home and Community Based Services, such as the Veteran-Directed Care (VDC) program. VDC is a multi-sector program implemented as a collaboration between individual VHA medical centers (VAMCs) and Aging and Disability Network Agencies (ADNAs), entities that sit outside the VHA. Factors that affect establishment of effective multi-sector programs such as VDC are poorly understood, limiting ability to effectively deliver and scale programs. We conducted a qualitative study to describe factors affecting the interorganizational implementation context of VDC. Using constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we interviewed VDC coordinators from seven different VAMC-ADNA partnerships that initiated the VDC program between 2017 and 2018. We identified eight CFIR determinants which manifested similarly for the VAMCs and ADNAs: evidence strength and quality, relative advantage, adaptability, tension for change, access to knowledge and information, self-efficacy; engaging, and champions. We identified three CFIR determinants that varied dramatically across VAMCs and ADNAs: available resources, implementation climate, and relative priority. Our results suggest that interorganizational context plays a critical and dynamic role within multi-sector collaborations.

"It's Changed Everything": Voices of Veterans in the Veteran-Directed Home and Community Based Services Program.

The purpose of this study was to understand the value and impact of the Veteran-Directed Home and Community Based Services program (VD-HCBS) on Veterans' lives in their own voices. Focus groups and individual interviews by telephone were conducted to elicit participant perspectives on what was most meaningful, and what difference VD-HCBS made in their lives. Transcripts were analyzed using content analysis. The sample included 21 Veterans, with a mean age of 66±14, enrolled in VD-HCBS an average of 20.8 months. All were at risk of institutional placement based on their level of disability. Five major categories captured the information provided by participants: What a Difference Choice Makes; I'm a Person!; It's a Home-Saver; Coming Back to Life; and Keeping Me Healthy & Safe. Participants described the program as life changing. This study is the first time that Veterans themselves have identified the ways in which VD-HCBS impacted their lives, uncovering the mechanisms underlying positive outcomes. These categories revealed new ways of understanding VD-HCBS as an innovative approach to meeting the person-centered needs of Veterans wishing to remain at home, while experiencing quality care and leading meaningful lives, areas identified as priorities for improving long term services and supports.

Determinants of inter-organizational implementation success: A mixed-methods evaluation of Veteran Directed Care.

BACKGROUND: Veteran Directed Care (VDC) aims to keep Veterans at risk for nursing home placement in their communities. VA medical centers (VAMCs) purchase VDC from third-party organizational providers who then partner with them during implementation. Experiences with VDC implementation have varied. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify conditions differentiating partnerships with higher enrollment (implementation success). METHODS: We conducted a case-based study with: qualitative data on implementation determinants two and eight months after program start, directed content analysis to assign numerical scores (-2 strong barrier to +2 strong facilitator), and mathematical modeling using Coincidence Analysis (CNA) to identify key determinants of implementation success. Cases consisted of VAMCs and partnering non-VAMC organizations who started VDC during 2017 or 2018. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided analysis. RESULTS: Eleven individual organizations within five partnerships constituted our sample. Two CFIR determinants- Networks & Communication and External Change Agent-uniquely and consistently identified implementation success. At an inter-organizational partnership level, Networks & Communications and External Change Agent +2 (i.e., present as strong facilitators) were both necessary and sufficient. At a within-organization level, Networks & Communication +2 was necessary but not sufficient for the non-VAMC providers, whereas External Change Agent +2 was necessary and sufficient for VAMCs. CONCLUSION: Networks & Communication and External Change Agent played difference-making roles in inter-organizational implementation success, which differ by type of organization and level of analysis. IMPLICATIONS: This multi-level approach identified crucial difference-making conditions for inter-organizational implementation success when putting a program into practice requires partnerships across multiple organizations.