Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Medical Home: Care Coordination.

MCHbest Logo

Strategy. Family Engagement

Approach. Providing care coordination training to families with CYSHCN leads to improved peer support and communications with providers.

Return to main MCHbest page >>

Overview. The Care Coordination: Empowering Families. (CCEF) training program is a promising practice for facilitating medical home use among children and youth with special healthcare needs. (CYSHCN).[1] Participants' perception of care coordination skills significantly improved in the areas of peer support and communication with care providers at the 1-year follow-up assessment compared to the pre-training assessment.[1] Families who attended the training report being the primary source of care coordination for their children, and 83.7% see their role in their child’s healthcare changing as a result of the training.[1]

Evidence. Emerging Evidence. Strategies based on emerging evidence show promise but have not undergone extensive testing. While these approaches demonstrate potential, their effectiveness remains unconfirmed. Prioritize rigorous monitoring to ensure they achieve desired outcomes for all MCH populations.

Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source.

Potential Data Sources. Data to support this strategy can be accessed through:

  • Parent/caregiver-reported outcome measures on asthma control
  • Community health worker activity logs
  • Patient/caregiver and family satisfaction surveys

Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):

  • Health and Health Behaviors/Behavior Change. This strategy improves individuals' physical and mental health and their adoption of healthy behaviors (e.g., healthy eating, physical activity).
  • Patient Experience of Care. This study improves individuals' perceptions, feelings, and satisfaction with the healthcare services they receive.
  • Utilization. This strategy improves the extent to which individuals and communities use available healthcare services.

Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.

Intervention Type. Health Teaching (Education and Promotion) (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).

Intervention Level. Individual/Family-Focused

Examples from the Field. There are currently no ESMs that use this strategy. Search similar intervention components in the ESM database.

Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the RBA framework (see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort (“What/how much did we do?”)

  • Number of families with children with special healthcare needs. (CSHCN) participating in care coordination training. (Measures reach of family training intervention)
  • Number of peer support groups established for families who completed care coordination training. (Assesses development of peer support infrastructure)

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort (“How well did we do it?”)

  • Percent of family care coordination training programs co-designed by families with practical experience. (Measures authentic family partnership in training design)
  • Percent of families demonstrating mastery of core care coordination competencies after training. (Assesses training proficiency rates)

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect (“Is anyone better off?”)

  • Number of families reporting increased skills in coordinating their child's care after training. (Measures direct impact of training on family capacity)
  • Percent of CSHCN receiving well-coordinated, family-centered services from trained family care coordinators. (Assesses quality of care for CSHCN with trained coordinators)
  • Number of healthcare organizations adopting family care coordination training as a standard component of CSHCN care. (Measures diffusion of family care coordination models)
  • Number of family leaders influencing policies for CSHCN based on their care coordination training. (Assesses macro-level impact of trained family coordinators)

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect (“How are they better off?”)

  • Percent of family care coordination training faculty who are compensated as equal partners. (Measures power structures of training initiatives)
  • Percent of training resources tailored to communities experiencing the greatest differences in CSHCN care. (Assesses application of tailored universalism in training)
  • Percent reduction in differences in care coordination access for CSHCN from all backgrounds. (Measures impact of training on health outcomes)
  • Percent of families reporting that training equipped them to challenge systems of in care. (Assesses perceptions of training as tool for systems change)

Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:

  1. Move from measuring quantity to quality.
  2. Move from measuring effort to effect.
  3. Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
  4. The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.

References

[1] Ufer, L.G., Moore, J.A., Hawkins, K. et al. Care Coordination: Empowering Families, a Promising Practice to Facilitate Medical Home Use Among Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs. Matern Child Health J 22, 648–659 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-018-2477-2

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.