Strengthening and Supporting Family Caregivers: The UJC Family Caregiver Access Network (FCAN) Project

Transcription

1 Strengthening and Supporting Family Caregivers: The UJC Family Caregiver Access Network (FCAN) Project Barbara Joyce Bedney, Ph.D., M.S.W. Michelle Labgold, M.P.A. Robert Goldberg, J.D UJC-Israel Exchange - Jerusalem, Israel June 20, 2007 Cheryl Fishbein, Chair UJC Family Caregivers Committee

2 Definition Family caregivers are individuals who provide care to family members and friends with physical, mental, and/or emotional impairments 2

3 Facts Family caregivers provide about 80% of the community care in the U.S. 1 30% of family caregivers caring for an older adult are themselves 65 or over 2 60% of family caregivers are women 3 1 U.S. Administration on Aging (2004). Compassion in Action. Washington, D.C.: AoA. 2 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2001). The Characteristics of Long-Term care Users. Rockville, MD: U.S. DHHS. 3 National Alliance for Caregiving and AARP (2004). Caregiving in the U.S. Bethesda, MD: NAC. 3

4 Facts The value of the services family caregivers provide for free is estimated to be $306 billion a year almost twice as much as is spent on homecare and nursing home services combined 1 1 National Family Caregivers Association and Family Caregiver Alliance (2006). Prevalence, hours, and Economic Value of Family Caregiving: Updated State-by-State Analysis of 2004 National Estimates. Peter Arno. Kensington, MD: NFCA, and San Francisco, CA: FCA. 4

5 Health Consequences Family caregivers suffer from chronic conditions at more than twice the rate of non-family caregivers 1 Family caregivers are vulnerable to infection and increased risk of cancers 2 1 U.S. Administration on Aging (2004). Compassion in Action. Washington, D.C.: AoA. 2 Kiecolt-Glaser et al (1991). Spousal Caregivers of Dementia Victims: Longitudinal Changes in Immunity and Health. Psychosomatic Medicine, 53(4),

6 Health Consequences Declining health in family caregivers poses the greatest risk for the institutionalization of care recipients 1 1 Talley, R.H., and Crews, J.H. (2007). Framing the Public Health of Caregiving. American Journal of Public Health, 92(2):

7 Mental Health Consequences Half of all family caregivers suffer from feelings of isolation 1 Half report that the burden of family caregiving is too much for them to handle 2 1 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2001). A Portrait of Informal Caregivers in America, Princeton, NJ: RWJ Foundation. 2 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2001). A Portrait of Informal Caregivers in America, Princeton, NJ: RWJ Foundation. 7

8 Mental Health Consequences 40-70% of family caregivers have clinically significant symptoms of depression 1 Family caregivers are at risk for increased alcohol and substance use as a response to the stress of caregiving 2 1 Zarit, S. (2006). Assessment of Family Caregivers: A Research Perspective. In Family Caregiver Alliance (Eds.), Caregiver Assessment: Views from the Field. San Francisco, CA: FCA. 2 U.S. Administration on Aging (2004). Compassion in Action. Washington, D.C.: AoA. 8

9 Consequences at Work 40% of family caregivers report that caregiving has affected their ability to advance in their jobs 1 Family caregivers each lose an average of $659,000 over a lifetime in lost wages and benefits 2 1 MetLife Mature Market Institute (1999). The MetLife Juggling Act Study. Westport, CT: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. 2 U.S. Administration on Aging (2004). Compassion in Action. Washington, D.C.: AoA. 9

10 Family Caregiver Support Programs Family caregiver support services can diminish caregiver burden, allow caregivers to remain in the workforce, and prevent or delay out-of-home placement for care recipients 1 1 U.S. Administration on Aging (2004). Compassion in Action. Washington, D.C.: AoA. 10

11 Family Caregiver Support Programs: Targets of Intervention (Gutheil and Chernesky, 1999) Caregivers Care recipients Social service delivery systems 11

12 Family Caregiver Support Programs The National Family Caregiver Support Program: Created by Congress in 2000 Calls for states, working with area agencies on aging and local community providers, to provide caregiver support services including information, counseling, support groups, training, respite, and supplemental services 12

13 Family Caregiver Support Programs Federation Services: Information and referral Respite Support groups and counseling Case management Education and training Other support services 13

14 Network (FCAN) Model Theoretical Framework: The caregiver career: (Montgomery & Kosloski, 1999): 1. Performance of initial caregiving tasks 2. Self-identification as a caregiver 3. Provision of personal care 4. Seeking out and using formal caregiver support services 14

15 Network (FCAN) Model Theoretical Framework: The caregiver career: (Montgomery & Kosloski, 1999): 5. Consideration of institutionalization of the care recipient 6. Nursing home placement 7. Termination of the caregiving role 15

16 Network (FCAN) Model Literature review: Family caregivers often do not use existing support services, for three primary reasons: Lack of self-identification Inadequate assessment Poor service coordination 16

17 Network (FCAN) Model Family Caregiver Access Networks (FCANs) are family caregiver resource centers designed to enable family caregivers to access and use the services that can help them maintain their health, well-being, and ability to continue in the caregiving role 17

18 Network (FCAN) Model Core Activities: 1) Outreach/education/awareness: Interventions designed to promote selfidentification among family caregivers and mobilize them to seek out family caregiver support services 18

19 Network (FCAN) Model Core Activities: 2) Assessment: Interventions designed to ensure that the needs, strengths, preferences, etc., of family caregivers are assessed and understood, and that referrals to support services are made based on those needs and preferences 19

20 Network (FCAN) Model Core Activities: 3) Service coordination: Interventions designed to eliminate gaps and duplications in service, and to promote the ability of family caregivers to access services in an efficient and effective manner 20

21 Network (FCAN) Model ISSUE ACTIVITY SHORT-TERM INTERMEDIATE GOAL GOAL LONG-TERM GOAL Non selfidentification as a caregiver Lack of referral to appropriate services Fragmented service delivery Outreach Awareness Education Caregiver Assessment Service Coordination Caregiver selfidentification Referral to appropriate services Seamless service delivery Increased service utilization Increased service utilization Increased service utilization Improved health and wellbeing of family caregivers and increased ability to sustain their caregiving in a positive way 21

22 Network (FCAN) Model The caregiver career model, revisited: Stage: Initiation of Caregiving Performance of initial caregiving tasks Self-identification as a caregiver Provision of personal care FCAN Intervention: Outreach 22

23 Network (FCAN) Model The caregiver career model, revisited: Stage: Exploration of Caregiver Services Thinking about using formal caregiver support services Deciding which support services to use FCAN Intervention: Caregiver Assessment 23

24 Network (FCAN) Model The caregiver career model, revisited: Stage: Formal Service Use Use of caregiver support services Consideration of nursing home placement Nursing home placement Termination of the caregiving role and use of support services for as long as necessary FCAN Intervention 24 Service Coordination

25 Network Pilot Project 3-year pilot project in which UJC and a small group of federations will test the ability of FCANs to: Increase caregiver self-identification Improve caregiver assessment Improve service coordination Improve the health and well-being of family caregivers 25

26 Network Pilot Project Timeline: Pre-planning stage UJC recruits communities for the pilot, creates planning and evaluation materials, convenes conference calls 26

27 Network Pilot Project Planning stage: Year 1 Communities identify gaps in services, create mission statements, establish community partnerships, etc. UJC creates and disseminates planning materials, convenes conference calls, and creates a national evaluation strategy 27

28 Network Pilot Project Implementation Stage : Years 1 3 Communities implement and monitor the three core components of the model (outreach, assessment, service coordination) UJC creates implementation materials, convenes conference calls, conducts a national process evaluation 28

29 Network Pilot Project Evaluation stage: Years 1 3 Communities assess the impact of their FCAN activities on the community and on family caregivers who use FCAN services UJC creates national evaluation materials, convenes conference calls, and conducts a national outcomes evaluation of the FCAN model 29

30 Network Pilot Project Dissemination/Sustainability stage: Years 1 3 Communities sustain their local FCAN projects and work with UJC to disseminate results of the pilot UJC convenes conference calls and works with communities on national and international dissemination of the pilot 30

31 Network Pilot Project Materials: 1) The FCAN Demonstration Project: A Planning and Resource Guide: Theoretical framework and model Family caregiver outreach strategies Family caregiver assessment tool Service coordination strategies 31

32 Network Pilot Project Materials: 2) The FCAN Demonstration Project: A Project Toolbox: Service mapping instruments Process evaluation tools Outcomes evaluation tool (family caregiver survey) Planning instruments and logs 32

33 Network Pilot Project: Next Steps Funding efforts: 1) Federal Demonstration Initiative Project initiated to help 5 communities (Baltimore, Chicago, Durham-Chapel Hill, New York, and New Haven) apply for federal demonstration dollars to develop and test the FCAN model 33

34 Network Pilot Project: Next Steps Funding efforts: 2) Foundation Initiative Project initiated to seek foundation dollars to develop and test the FCAN model in 5-7 communities across the country 34

35 Contact Information Barbara Joyce Bedney, Ph.D., M.S.W. Assistant Director, Domestic Affairs ; Michelle Labgold, M.P.A. Senior Director, Domestic Affairs ; 35