A maturity grid assessment tool for learning networks

Abstract

Background: The vision of learning healthcare systems (LHSs) is attractive as a more effective model for health care services, but achieving the vision is complex. There is limited literature describing the processes needed to construct such multicomponent systems or to assess development. Methods:We used the concept of a capability maturity matrix to describe the maturation of necessary infrastructure and processes to create learning networks (LNs), multisite collaborative LHSs that use an actor-oriented network organizational architecture. We developed a network maturity grid (NMG) assessment tool by incorporating information from literature review, content theory from existing networks, and expert opinion to establish domains and components. We refined the maturity grid in response to feedback from network leadership teams. We followed NMG scores over time for nine LNs and plotted scores for each domain component with respect to SD for one participating network. We sought subjective feedback on the experience of applying the NMG to individual networks.Results: LN leaders evaluated the scope, depth, and applicability of the NMG to their networks. Qualitative feedback from network leaders indicated that changes in NMG scores over time aligned with leaders' reports about growth in specific domains; changes in scores were consistent with network efforts to improve in various areas.Scores over time showed differences in maturation in the individual domains of each network. Scoring patterns, and SD for domain component scores, indicated consistency among LN leaders in some but not all aspects of network maturity. A case

Collaborative conversations during the time of COVID‐19: Building a “meta”‐learning community

“…The collaborative processes, mechanisms, and structures that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic may forever shape how people work in the future. In addition, further iteration and development of the project taxonomy we proposed here is also an area ripe for future research, and aligns with other ongoing efforts15 to help participants in Learning Health Systems and other collaborative groups understand their progress and plan their activities.…”

“…While based on a small sample, we believe this taxonomy develops a framework that may be used to characterize other Learning Communities as instantiations of the LHS model. This could serve several purposes related to understanding the activities and maturity of an LC, and could be used in conjunction with other frameworks, such as the maturity grid designed by Lannon et al 15…”

A collaborative learning health system agent‐based model: Computational and face validity

“…CLHSs typically undergo annual strategic planning to decide on high priority areas for improvement. Many use a network maturity grid 45 to self‐assess the maturity of processes that undergird CLHS change concepts. By reviewing these ratings holistically, CLHS leaders can identify particular processes and targets for those processes (eg, “Within the Quality Improvement domain, we intend to advance process maturity in ‘Quality Improvement Reports’ from our current state of ‘QI reports generated manually’ to ‘QI reports are produced automatically’” or “Within the Governance and Management domain, we intend to advance process maturity in ‘Accessibility to knowledge and tools’ from ‘A commons is available, but with no active curation, limited sharing’ to ‘Commons is accessible, with some curation, and some sharing’”).…”

The Indiana Learning Health System Initiative: Early experience developing a collaborative, regional learning health system

“…A final area of continuing interest is the need to fully document and analyze the development of the ILHSI in its current and future stages, and to report those results to the healthcare research, practice, and policy communities in order that all may benefit from our experiences. Among these efforts is our interest in assessing how our experience can serve as a case study in the growing scholarship on maturity levels in LHSs, 43 as well as continuing to publish studies of both individual projects and overall system development.…”