STATEWIDE HOSPICE CLERGY END-OF-LIFE EDUCATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Regional Coordinator(s) | Region (Target Counties) | Pieces Distributed |
Health Council of South Florida, Inc.
|
Miami-Dade Miami-Dade Broward |
214 1,873 |
| Health Planning Council of Southwest Florida, Inc. | Lee | 750 |
| Local Health Council of East Central Florida, Inc. | Orange | 379 |
| Northwest Florida Health Council, Inc./Big Bend Health Council, Inc. | EscambiaLeon | 900 |
| Suncoast Health Council, Inc./Health Council of West Central Florida, Inc. | PinellasHillsborough | 1,259 |
| Treasure Coast Health Council, Inc. | Palm Beach | 420 |
| TOTAL | 5,795 |
The recruitment process included:
A pilot test of the curriculum, presented as a one-day workshop was conducted on January 13, 2003 by the Health Council of South Florida. Twenty-one people attended the program including ministers, chaplains, pastors, caregiver support staff and bereavement counselors. The pilot test confirmed that the program format, agenda, schedule, including the time allotments for material coverage were suitable for the educational program. The content of the modules was also extremely well received and the evaluations of the trainers received favorable scores. The Dying Process was considered the most useful program component. Based on pre-test and post-test results, about half of the participants indicated an increase in their overall knowledge of end-of-life care issues. By the end of the session, however, using a retrospective assessment of knowledge, nearly two-thirds of participants indicated an increase in their overall knowledge of end-of-life issues. They indicated that the program was of particular interest because it included not only information about death and dying, but also the options available for those at end of life, caregiving and needs of the dying, followed by self care for clergy. Many participants remarked that few programs include the importance of the clergy taking care of themselves. (See Attachment I)
The pilot test program format, agenda, schedule and summary results of the evaluation were presented to the regional coordinators in a technical assistance conference call on January 17, 2003. This information was provided so that the coordinators could benefit from the lessons learned and the challenges faced during the recruitment phase and pilot educational program. A video of the pilot program was prepared and disseminated to the regions. It provided highlights of the five-hour pilot test session. It showcased some of the modules as presented by the featured speakers, captured interaction with the participants and modeled how to summarize the materials presented. Other topics covered in the technical assistance calls included the outreach and marketing materials, consumer materials, regional coordinators' toolkit, contract review and regional deliverables. Timelines and procedures were discussed in full detail. The regions were encouraged to tailor their sessions in length, time of day, and module content to the respective communities' needs and interests.
A second technical assistance conference call occurred on February 25, 2003. This call provided technical assistance to the regional coordinators on the presentation of the summary reports and the educational session evaluation results. The training calendar was reviewed for clarity and coordination. Attendance at the preliminary sessions was discussed and suggestions were provided on different proven recruitment strategies to buttress attendance. The format for the evaluation reporting process was described for the first set of deliverables as contained in the interim report. A two-page model reporting format was distributed to each region and the well-attended Hollywood Hills evaluation results were provided as a model for compiling the evaluation data for each educational session.
A third and final technical assistance call was held on April 9, 2003. An extensive debriefing occurred on the implementation of the educational sessions. A discussion was held on the profile of the participants in sessions, the best practices for recruitment such as the use of local media (TV and radio), the needs of the clergy participating in the sessions, and areas for future exploration such as advance care planning and practical guidance on how to complete the various forms (e.g., living wills, health care surrogates, durable power of attorney, etc.). Specific reporting requirements and project deliverable deadlines were also covered.
In terms of reporting tools, instruments were developed both for the regional coordinators and the statewide regional coordinator that codified the technical assistance and project oversight during the field experience. Selected items are contained in Attachment J.
D. REGIONAL EDUCATION SESSIONS
Following the pilot test (on January 13, 2003), 21 educational sessions were conducted in the six regions across the state from February 5, 2003 through April 23, 2003. (See Attachment K for a list of the sessions as displayed by health planning district.)
Each region held between three and four sessions. All sites offered the
program at different locations with the exception of Treasure Coast Health Council which
conducted two at its office and were later combined as one session/site. Three regions
determined that it was necessary to cancel a single session, largely due to the need to
allow more time for advertisement and recruitment to take place. Only one cancelled
due to poor registration in March.
Momentum was generated as the program became publicized across the local communities. "Word of mouth" advertisement in particular, prompted a surge in overall participation. During the initial 11 sessions there were 236 participants and two cancellations. In the latter sessions, there were 377 participants with a single cancellation, and an increased participation rate of nearly 60%. This informal advertisement complemented the distribution of the program flyers and encouraged more clergy to attend. As momentum grew, the project team began to realize a greater return on its investment and generated a stronger outcome of increased program participation.