1. References
2. Key
2.1. VAT learning style
2.2. DiSC personality
2.3. future connections
2.4. stakeholders
2.5. obstacles
2.6. diffusing innovation
2.7. outcomes
2.8. change management
3. Week 4
3.1. Evaluation technique (TACOS)
3.1.1. Trialability
3.1.1.1. prototyping
3.1.1.1.1. evolution
3.1.1.2. external crowd sourcing
3.1.2. Advantage
3.1.2.1. user feedback
3.1.2.1.1. any deterring from the vision of the application, problems will be able to be addressed in real time
3.1.2.1.2. value-based survey tracking
3.1.2.2. vocalize vision and direction
3.1.2.2.1. increased usage
3.1.2.3. address program flaws before competitors
3.1.2.3.1. adoption
3.1.3. Compatibility
3.1.3.1. understanding healthcare finance culture
3.1.3.1.1. identifying patient perception
3.1.3.1.2. adapting to finance and insurance verifier needs for the app
3.1.3.1.3. identifying provider perception
3.1.4. Observability
3.1.4.1. tacit knowledge
3.1.4.2. demonstrate app to colleagues
3.1.4.3. usage
3.1.4.3.1. built-in analytics programs to track usage by providers and patients
3.1.5. Simplicity
3.1.5.1. critical mass
3.1.5.2. time it takes to increase amount of users
3.1.5.2.1. track retention rates
4. Week 5
4.1. Strategies
4.1.1. collaborate
4.1.1.1. members of organizations are full participants
4.1.1.2. data sharing/integration
4.1.1.3. define organization by sharing mission
4.1.2. "focus on value"
4.1.2.1. healthy outcomes
4.1.2.2. cost controlled
4.1.2.3. team innovation skills
4.1.3. conversations with people to assess needs
4.1.3.1. patients
4.1.3.2. caregivers
4.1.3.3. point of service
4.1.3.4. community
4.1.4. evaluate organizational structure
4.1.4.1. create an environment for innovation (Fonseca, 2002)
4.1.4.2. create the organization's future utilizing purpose as a guide
4.1.4.3. identify key stakeholders
4.1.4.3.1. access team's innovative intelligence
4.2. Change Management
4.2.1. demand to change
4.2.1.1. respond to unplanned crisis
4.2.1.2. comittment
4.2.1.3. integrate team's skill for advancement
4.2.1.4. investment
4.2.1.5. ability to organize around change
4.3. Barriers
4.3.1. implementing amongst other innovations
4.3.1.1. comprehensive registration
4.3.1.2. already established programs within organizaton
4.3.1.2.1. Cerner
4.3.1.2.2. MedAssets
4.3.2. additional costs for new program
4.3.3. learning new program and implementing
5. Week 6
5.1. Timeline
5.1.1. Feedback
5.1.1.1. 30-day trial
5.1.1.2. User surveys
5.1.1.2.1. stakeholder feedback
5.1.1.3. similar application pitfalls and advantages
5.1.1.4. beta-testing
5.1.1.4.1. small parts of app introduced at a time
5.1.1.4.2. allows for user creation of app
5.1.2. Prototyping
5.1.2.1. 6-months
5.1.2.2. application design
5.1.2.2.1. picture vs. numbers to display financial information
5.1.2.2.2. downloading
5.1.2.2.3. accessibility on multiple devices (i.e. computer, tablet, mobile)
5.1.2.3. initial funding request
5.1.2.3.1. investor backing
5.1.3. Launch
5.1.3.1. 12-months
5.1.3.2. market
5.1.3.3. emphasize mission
5.1.3.4. funding
5.1.3.4.1. make sure stay on budget
5.1.3.5. emphasize user-friendly
5.1.3.5.1. invest in constant feedback
5.1.4. Updates
5.1.4.1. Every 3 months
5.1.4.2. encourage continuous user feedback
5.1.4.3. track usage
6. Week 1
6.1. the need
6.1.1. provides knowledge about out-of-pocket costs for healthcare services
6.1.1.1. will allow patient's to make informed decisions in their healthcare
6.1.2. patient's need accessibility
6.1.2.1. enhance patient engagement
6.2. social context
6.2.1. patients can shop around for the healthcare services
6.2.1.1. become active consumers in their healthcare
6.2.2. intervention that touches on "a person's sense of worth and desire to be respected" (Hamalainen & Saarinen, n.d., p. 191)
6.2.2.1. transparency for patients
6.2.2.2. potential for providers paid for services up front for patient portions of the cost more often
6.2.2.3. connect the divide between care and cost
6.3. synthesis
6.3.1. "Innovation: applied creativity that achieves business value" (Weiss & Legrand, 2011, p. 6)
6.3.1.1. create more revenue for organization through transparency
6.3.1.2. synthesize the data given to patients by other providers
6.3.2. drive third-party payers to encourage members to our organization
6.3.2.1. could offer a discount based on the volume of patients sent to the organization (Nowicki, 2015)
6.3.2.2. could bridge the gap between insurance companies and care
6.3.2.2.1. incentives to comprehensive healthcare services
6.3.2.2.2. incentives to enhancing the EMR
6.4. demand
6.4.1. a way to synthesize the EMR
6.4.1.1. built into patient portal
6.4.1.2. patients can access medical records as well as a breakdown of costs of each services
6.4.1.3. combine billing, patient access and clinical data
6.4.2. reduce schedule procedure cancellations due to unanticipated out-of-pocket costs for patients
6.4.2.1. aware of the costs of their healthcare services prior to scheduling
6.4.2.2. organization needs guidelines to relay costs to patients
7. Week 2
7.1. Stakeholders
7.1.1. providers
7.1.1.1. combine patient portal information from office to facility
7.1.1.2. patient outreach through their websites
7.1.1.3. comprehensive provider specialties list
7.1.2. app developers
7.1.2.1. user-friendly tool
7.1.2.2. interactive
7.1.2.2.1. relatable data
7.1.2.3. visually appealing
7.1.2.3.1. clearly defined tools within the app
7.1.2.4. content is appealing
7.1.3. social media experts
7.1.3.1. get the word out about Health Stash
7.1.3.2. create an open conversation of budget and health
7.1.4. patients
7.1.4.1. engagement is measurement of success of app
7.1.4.2. health goals and outcomes
7.1.5. caregivers
7.1.5.1. make connections with patient needs
7.1.5.2. make connections with provider needs
7.1.6. hospitals and their resources
7.1.6.1. cautious and reflective (Balance Work Force, 2014)
7.1.6.2. connect specialists through carefully chosen recruiters
7.1.7. insurance companies
7.1.7.1. contracted rates with facility to help calculate budget on Health Stash
7.1.7.2. future evolution
7.1.8. accountants
7.1.8.1. ability to align budget and needs
7.1.8.2. budgets are organized and clear to users
7.2. VAT and DiSC assets
7.2.1. Steadiness
7.2.1.1. makes sure everyone's contributions matter
7.2.1.2. consistent
7.2.1.3. collaborator
7.2.2. Conscientiousness
7.2.2.1. accuracy
7.2.2.2. willing to challenge ideas
7.2.2.3. finds practical solutions to complex problems
7.2.3. Visual
7.2.3.1. Health Stash will be visually appealing
7.2.3.2. make potential users want to click and check it out
7.2.3.3. make sure the tools are clearly defined within the app
7.2.3.3.1. make sure budgets are clear to the user
7.2.3.3.2. data obtained through Health Stash is relatable
7.2.3.3.3. Health Stash tells a story of the patient's budget and their health
8. Week 3
8.1. Questions
8.1.1. What are the guidelines for the current Patient Portal to display protected health information to patients?
8.1.2. Are there current accountants in the business office that want to introduce their knowledge to the Patient Portal patient budget aspect?
8.1.3. What are the most frequent insurances with denied bill claims and what can we do to alleviate that?
8.1.3.1. Cigna
8.1.3.2. United Healthcare
8.1.3.3. BCBS
8.1.4. What are the current contracted rates that our organization has with insurance companies?
8.1.5. What are incentive program models that our top insurance companies have with our organization as well as others?
8.1.6. What are the biggest obstacles for patient collections after discharge?
8.1.6.1. incorrect demographic information
8.1.6.2. not knowing healthcare costs prior to scheduling out-patient procedures
8.1.7. What are patient motivations for paying bills for scheduled procedures?
8.1.8. What are patient's current ways for healthcare bill budgeting?
8.2. Information gathering
8.2.1. failed bill accounts
8.2.2. previous insurance payment tracking for procedures
8.2.3. business office collection process
8.2.3.1. survey calls
8.2.4. integration of care surveys
8.2.4.1. whether patient payments coincide with care received
8.2.4.2. quality surveys
8.2.4.3. assess effectiveness of virtual care system for budgeting (Porter-O'Grady & Malloch, 2010)