Ethnicity data consultation findings - Implications for ethnicity data users and recorders
0 likes302 views
The document discusses findings from a consultation on ethnicity data management within the health system, highlighting the challenges and preferences of stakeholders regarding data collection and recording processes. Key themes include the high value placed on ethnicity data, concerns about the introduction of a 'New Zealander' category, and the importance of standardized training and support for implementation. Recommendations emphasize the need for coordinated change management, maintaining existing prioritization methods, and further evaluation of costs and benefits related to data accuracy and granularity.
Ethnicity data consultation findings - Implications for ethnicity data users and recorders
- 1. Ethnicity data consultation findings Implications for ethnicity data users and recorders Alicia Webb Team Leader - Identity Data Management, Information Directorate HINZ Conference, 2008 © 2003 melissa gardi
- 2. Health System ethnicity data Uses Trend tracking by ethnicity Health outcomes improvement monitoring Health service targeting Ethnic group participation and contribution Role of Standards Data accuracy and consistency – time and datasets Consistency with Statistics NZ
- 3. About the Consultation Series of questions on proposed changes to align Statistics NZ and Health ethnicity Standards advantages & disadvantages information and training needs challenges for implementation Stakeholder responses Wide variety, mostly collective responses 38 submissions in total
- 4. Key response themes Poor understanding of ethnicity Variable collection and recording processes Ethnicity data highly valued Acceptance of codeset changes Concerns about New Zealander category Preference for Level 4 recording Preference for not increasing number of ethnicity fields Preference for retaining multiple response prioritisation Importance of co-ordinated change management Criticality of training and support
- 5. Understanding of Ethnicity Not a specific question within consultation but extensive comment Meaning of ethnicity – conceptual and contextual leads to complexity Purpose and benefits of ethnicity data collection and recording Public perception about the politics of ethnicity
- 6. Variable collection & recording processes Situational context – frontline tension and confusion Standards and training to guide behaviours Standardised tools and processes IT systems support Administrative vs survey settings
- 7. Ethnicity data highly valued Despite inherent difficulties, high value placed on ethnicity data by Health System stakeholders strong reaction to threats to time-series data quality (ie inclusion of New Zealander category) strong desire for improving granularity ie Level 4 recording strong desire for improving understanding, processes and training
- 8. Acceptance of codeset changes Mandatory new codeset – technical changes across whole of Health System Concern about potential for New Zealander category future visibility at Level 2 Varied views on residual codes correct use, value and training burden improve granularity, reduce collection tension, specificity for health
- 9. Concerns about New Zealander category Not a specific consultation question but considerable feedback received New Zealander as an ethnic category - introduction of code at Level 4 and aggregation to Other at Level 2 No change in collection process but social marketing @ census Potential impact on data quality and time-series data – consistency and continuity
- 10. Preference for level 4 recording General agreement but need to assess costs/benefits Improved information to support planning, funding and service delivery Improved granularity supports ability to reduce inequalities Need ability to continue outputting ethnicity data at all levels as appropriate
- 11. Preference for not increasing number of ethnicity fields Mixed views indicate need to assess costs/benefits Accuracy improves information to support planning, funding and service delivery Completeness improves comparability with other Government datasets Need to relate number of fields to changes in response prioritisation process
- 12. Preference for retaining multiple response prioritisation Unanimous disagreement with input randomisation method introduced within the Standard Data loss issues Strong support to maintain existing prioritisation methods in Health System
- 13. Importance of co-ordinated change management Challenges of change funding Challenges of staff support and training Desire for leadership and co-ordination of all agreed ethnicity changes Desire to reduce risks around systems development and change Desire for staged implementation to reduce cost and resource burden
- 14. Criticality of training and support Role of frontline staff Potential exacerbation of existing collection and recording issues Great variance in preferred methods of training and support IT support and enablement
- 15. Implications for the Health System Continue coding at Level 2 with new codeset from 1 July 2009 Adoption of all residual codes within new codeset with guidance for use in Health System Continue recording up to 3 ethnicities from 1 July 2009 Continue practice of input prioritisation Enable reporting and outputting of ethnicity data at all levels held
- 16. Implications for the Health System Future system development capability and change Further work required on Consideration of optional to mandatory requirements for the Health System Possible use of input randomisation Assessment of ongoing training and support needs Ministry-led change co-ordination
- 17. Next Steps Scoping activity - Stage 1 implementation proposed for 1 July 2009, including: Codeset changes Ethnicity Data Protocols revision Training and support for new codeset implementation and to sustain ongoing data quality Further work on impact and cost-benefit analysis and associated training needs © 2003 melissa gardi