CHICAGO II Project Process

undefinedThe CHICAGO Collaboration II held regular project-wide meetings with key stakeholders including organizational leaders, collaborators and content experts in the school, medical, and community/family sectors. The project-wide meetings with community members have allowed the team to collect information about existing data, publications, activities, lessons learned, and to assist with planning the community needs assessment and information to consider while refining the Asthma Care Implementation Program (ACIP).

 

CHICAGO Collaboration II research team conducted a Community Needs Assessment utilizing a mixed-methods approach to leverage a range of engagement strategies, including in-person interviews, focus groups, user-centered observations, epidemiologic data, and healthcare utilization data to provide feedback on the ACIP.
 
Figure 1: CHICAGO II Community Needs Assessment Participants
 
Figure 2. CHICAGO II Other Sources of Data for Community Needs Assessment
The data collected was further analyzed to assess stakeholder perceptions of the fit and feasibility of each intervention based on their experience with the target population. The revised ACIP was presented to our stakeholders for their input in July 2017. You can learn more about our work and findings in our CHICAGO II Briefing Book..

 
On August 5, 2016, the U34-funded CHICAGO Collaboration II held a stakeholder meeting where the CNA results were presented and discussed using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Four of the U34 PIs and 14 additional stakeholders were present in the room, while another 10 participated via webinar. After the presentation of the CNA results, stakeholders were asked to “rank” a series of intervention options using RE-AIM implementation outcomes. Reach was defined as the amount of eligible children who would receive the intervention and the representativeness of this sample. Effectiveness was the potential effect of the intervention on an important outcome. Adoption was the percentage of eligible sites that would use the intervention. Implementation was the fidelity of the intervention over time and associated costs. Maintenance was the ability to sustain the intervention after cessation of grant funding. Stakeholders were encouraged to think about the practicality of these options if they were implemented in the U01 grant using existing evidence. In total, 23 stakeholders submitted ranking data; 14 described themselves as from the Medical Care Sector, 2 from the Home Environment Sector, and 7 from the Community/Schools Sector. The stakeholders then discussed how to best identify Chicago’s high-risk target population. Options for outcomes and what stakeholders needed to maintain programs were extensively discussed. All sectors were represented and these results therefore represent the outcomes stakeholders want to see from the U01.

At the conclusion of the U34 project period, the CHICAGO Collaboration II team submitted an application for a U01 grant (RFA-HL-17-001) to support the clinical trial, assessment of the sustainability of the proposed ACIP interventions, and define best practices for implementation of interventions in children at high risk of poor asthma outcomes.