Minutes for WHRN Tools and Resources Working Group Conference Call, September 21, 2015

Participants:  Jean Abraham, Lisa Brosseau, Jeff Harris, Laura Linnan, Meg Pomerantz, Enid Chung Roemer, Melanie Studer

Absent:  Joanne Pike

  1. Welcome– Jean welcomed the group.
  1. Approval of the minutes and action items from our last call – The minutes for the previous call were approved by consensus.
  1. New project – Jean reminded the group about the Organizational Health Assessments (HERO tool, CDC Scorecard, Work Health America tool, etc.) Review Manuscript that we discussed on the last call. Jean introduced Melanie (new Research Assistant and doctoral student at UNC) to the group.  Melanie informed the group that she is taking a course this semester that she will use this project as her class project.  Melanie will share with the group the work that she has already completed related to a background literature review.  Jean noted that Melanie has outlined the key issues that will need to be discussed.  Jeff asked for clarification whether Melanie is interested in tools for large or small employers.  Melanie noted that she thought she would try to include both.  Enid asked whether Melanie reviewed an article that she, Ron and others published in 2013.  Melanie replied that she has the article.  Jean asked which tools that she is considering reviewing.  Melanie listed all the possible tools.  Jeff also noted the HealthLinks tool.  He would also like to see how the tools help with readiness and structure and how to characterize what the tools will do.   Laura also noted that she touched base with Nkenge that this is not a conflict with her work.  The group is interested in this project.  Laura noted that the next step would be for Melanie to share her background information and an outline.  Members of the working group will give feedback and let Melanie know if they are interested in writing a paper on this topic.  Jeff noted that he is interested.
  1. Project Updates
    • Broker/agent project – Jean had shared a version 1 analysis plan for this project. She noted the following:  we need to do some research on this group, we may work with NAHU, and that we decided that interviews (and not focus groups) will most likely work better for this project given the competitive nature of this group.  Jean provided a table of topics and questions for this project.  Laura asked for clarification regarding NAHU.  Jean and Jeff explained their experience with this group.  Jean noted that we are targeting 30-40 minutes per interview, and each center would conduct about 5 interviews.  The group reviewed the table with the topics and provided Jean with feedback.  Jean suggested 1) that folks review the table, and 2) have 1 or 2 members reaching out to their local NAHU members to determine whether we are asking the right questions.  She noted that she would like to have a good draft instrument within a month or 2.  Next steps all members will provide Jean with formal feedback.  Jean will reach out the Minnesota NAHU representative and share the questions that she develops via email.
    • Dartmouth CDC ScoreCard Data – Jean updated the group that she has sent an email to the folks at Dartmouth and will update the group via email when she hears back from them.
  1. Future Calls – Meg will distribute a Doodle poll to arrange the next call.
  1. Action Items
    • Melanie will share with the group the work that she has already completed related to a background literature review for the Organizational Health Assessments (HERO tool, CDC Scorecard, Work Health America tool, etc.) Review Manuscript.
    • All members of the broker/agent project will review the project table, reach out to 1 or 2 members of their local NAHU to determine whether we are asking the right questions, and provide Jean with feedback.
    • Jean will update the group via email when she hears back from the Dartmouth group regarding their CDC ScoreCard data.