Learning Objectives for this Presentation:
By the end of the presentation participants will be able to:
-Understand the IPI program and how it can be adapted.
-Identify IPI program components key to the CQI process.
-Identify and discuss potential barriers to the CQI process.


Background:
IPI is a component of the Immunization program at the Minnesota Department of Health. The program enhances the federal VFC and AFIX programs by merging the key aspects of each and targeting them at the provider level. The IPI program focuses on provider quality assurance (program accountability) yet clearly intersects aspects of vaccine management, such as storage and handling. Furthermore, it encompasses the federally required VFC site visit.
The program has been in place since 2001. It was recognized through visit reports and repeat visits that suggestions/recommendations were not implemented and there was lack of follow-up by assessors. In June, the program was further enhanced to include the following components:
-A continuous quality improvement (CQI) plan that is a public-private collaboration toward workable practice change.
-A reward/recognition for the champions who demonstrate immunization excellence.


Setting:
Public and private clinics, public health departments, and hospitals.

Population:
Local and state immunization program staff and immunization providers.

Project Description:
IPI program advisors conduct site visits to immunization providers across the state to raise immunization coverage levels and improve standards of practices through a continuous quality improvement process. There are 5 types of site visits: 1) Limited-AFIX; 2) Comprehensive-AFIX; 3) Follow Up; 4) Educational; 5) CoCASA only. Site visits types one and two utilize the following tools: a) clinic checklist; b) provider questionnaire; and c) continuous quality improvement plan.

Results/Lessons Learned:
Accountability is an ongoing challenge for providers, clinics, and IPI program advisors. The CQI plan, as an additional tool, creates consistency, provides clarity and establishes uniformity of expectations. The tool has been used for 9 months. Continued evaluation is ongoing.