Collaboration Between Researchers and State Policymakers Slide Presentation from the AHRQ 2009 Annual ConferencSlide presentation from the AHRQ 2009 conference. On September 16, 2009, Robert St. Peter made this presentation at the 2009 Annual Conference. Select to access the PowerPoint® presentation (1.0 MB) (Plugin Software Help).Slide 1 Collaboration Between Researchers and State PolicymakersAHRQ Annual Meeting.September 16, 2009Robert F. St. Peter, M.D.President & CEOKansas Health Institute Slide 2 Communicating withPolicy MakersResearch competes for the attention of policy makers on two levelsSubject - health vs. all other public policy issues demanding attentionInfluence - objective information is only one voice among many affecting decisions by public policy makers Slide 3 Strategic Communication 101TacticsMessage DevelopmentAudience Identification & Research Slide 4 Kansas LegislatureCitizen legislatureIn session ~90 days every yearFive "health" committees Senate Public Health and WelfareSenate Financial Institutions and InsuranceHouse Health and Human ServicesHouse InsuranceHealth Policy Oversight CommitteeTwo budget committeesLeadership committee Slide 5 Kansas Legislature (cont.)Limited support staff Legislative Research Department (staff of 36, including clerical)Committee staff (primarily clerical)Personal staff (clerical, shared)Agency testimonyIt's not Washington, DC out there! OMB, GAO, CRS, AHRQ, think tanks, etc. Slide 6 Survey of Kansas Policy Makers (2003)State legislators 70% response rate (116/165)County commissioners 80% response rate (268/334)CATI-administered telephone surveyQuestions focused on sources and methods of receiving informationperceived information needs Slide 7 Sources of Health Policy Information: KS LegislatorsGraphic of KS legislators broken down by Frequently, Occasionally, and Never Slide 8 Information Sources for State Policy Makers, U.S.(scale from 1 to 5)RatingLegislative staff4.3State agencies4.1Constituents3.8Non-profit organizations3.5Legislators3.5Advocates/lobbyists3.3Sorian & Baugh, 2002 Slide 9 Preferred Ways to Receive Information(scale from 1 to 5)KS LegislatorsKS CommissionersTalking one-on-one w/ informed ind.8.78.8Reading brief summary material8.47.9Receiving testimony at hearing7.96.5Forums/seminars lasting 1-3 hours5.86.3News media articles/reports5.36.0Reading in-depth articles or reports4.85.7Watching videotapes4.75.3Conferences lasting 1 day or longer4.24.9Listening to audio tapes4.14.4 Slide 10 Length of Written Information"Ideal length of written materials you read to help you make policy decisions" (KS Legislators)Image of a pie chart of the length of written information.1 page of less: 23%2 or 3 pages: 50%4 to 10 pages: 4%As long as necessary: 18%Other: 5% Slide 11 Adequacy of Available Information"In making policy decisions, would you say you have enough reliable information on public health never, sometimes, usually, or always?" (KS Legislators)Image of a pie chart of the adequacy of available information.Never: 2%Sometimes: 30%Usually: 61%Always: 7% Slide 12 Framework for Knowledge TransferWhat should be transferred to decision makers (the message)?To whom should research knowledge be transferred (the target audience)?By whom should it be transferred (the messenger)?How should it be transferred (communications infrastructure)?With what effect should it be transferred (evaluation)?Lavis, et. al., 2003 Slide 13 What Should Be Transferred?Transfer actionable messages from a body of research knowledge, not simply a single research report or findings from a single studyResearch in the form of "ideas," not "data," is most influentialDecision makers rarely use a regression coefficient to solve a particular problemOver long periods of time, "ideas" enlighten decision makers about a particular issue and how to handle itLavis, et. al., 2003 Slide 14 How Should ItBe Transferred?Focus on "interactive engagement" InterpersonalExchange of ideasIterative"The research literature on which processes are best at transferring knowledge suggest that passive processes are ineffective and that interactive engagement may be most effective.. The hall mark of these interventions is interaction: interaction between the [subject] and an 'expert' . or interaction between the [subject] and someone to whom he or she routinely turns for guidance."Lavis et al., 2003 Slide 15 How Should ItBe Transferred? (cont.)Focus on process not events Long-termContinuousOutcome oriented" Over long periods of time, two-way 'exchange' processes that give equal importance to what researchers can learn from decision makers and what decision makers can learn from researchers can produce cultural shifts. Such cultural shifts can facilitate the ongoing use of research knowledge in decision making, not just one-off uses."Lavis, et al., 2003 Slide 16 Evolution of KHI Communication ActivitiesBriefs and reportsLegislative testimonyLegislative brown bags and forumsStudy groups for legislatureKHI News ServiceLegislative Health CaucusLegislative Health Academy Slide 17 Kansas Legislative Health AcademyLaunch in Fall 200912-15 legislators Selected with input from legislative leadershipSubstantial commitment of time 3-day retreat, three 2-day sessionsAt least one yearPayment of per diem and expensesSupport from legislative leadershipCertificate upon completionCurriculum integrates System dynamicsValues frameworkLeadership skills Slide 18 Considerations withActive EngagementRestrictions based on tax statusGovernmental ethics/open meetingsComfort with shared controlPotential for introduction of biasMaintaining credibility while in mixResources to sustain engagementDetermining effectiveness Slide 19 Kansas Health InstituteInformation for policy makers. Health for Kansans. Current as of December 2009 Internet Citation: Collaboration Between Researchers and State Policymakers: Slide Presentation from the AHRQ 2009 Annual Conferenc. December 2009. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/events/conference/2009/stpeter/index.html