Standards Technical Committee

Has anyone come across the Standards Technical Committees {Edited as I made an error in describing this!} for the Health Standards Organization?

I wrote up an application and was going to submit when I came across the time commitment. From this webpage:

Time commitment: While the Technical Committees
are standing, the length of term for members is 2-3 years. The time
commitment for members is approximately 7-10 hours per month, which
includes pre-reading, teleconferences, face-to-face meetings, and more.

It said they would pay for travel costs for meetings, but it seems like 7-10 hours to ask of patients is a lot! I tweeted them to ask if there would be any financial compensation for patients (haven't heard back yet). It looked like an interesting opportunity, but I'm thinking asking patients to contribute that amount of time, even if it was paid, seems to be a bit much.

I am an appointed public member of the Council of the College of Ocupational Therapists of Ontario. I applied through the Public Appointments Secretariat, and there are many organizations listed.

They all pay a per diem rate for public members of $150 per day, plus travel, and also for prep time. That seems to be standard for the public servce. I have learned a lot from being on the Council.

It's a contrast to the unpaid areas we are often involved with.

Angela will know more about Accred Canada - I did not even know they had a new name

Oops! I got that part about Health Standards Organization wrong (I have now edited my original post). It seems a bit confusing -- I think accreditation Canada International is now Health Standards which will be working alongside Accreditation Canada. https://www.hso.world/about/ Leslee Thompson explains more in the video on that webpage.

United under single leadership, HSO with Accreditation Canada as its affiliate, are working on a global scale to help people improve health systems and services in their local jurisdictions.

That's interesting to hear about your $150 rate. I wonder if this org might do something similar for patients?

Thanks for clarifying about the initiative Kimberley.

The honorarium for members of the public is paid by the provincial government to encourage citizens to be involved in oversight.

Most people who apply and are not in the profession seem to be other types of professionals like retired JP's, teachers etc. - I am the only person on the Council who would qualify as a patient. It has been well worth doing.

I have always been pretty laissez-faire about governance and the Council takes great pains to get it right.

I recently received the following note with a link to the HSO site which, as Kimberley has said, is affiliated to Accreditation Canada. There appear to be opportunities for Patients and Families to get involved in different ways. There is a paid staff position called a Patient Expert but there are also Expert Faculty roles and Technical Committee roles which do not state anything about compensation from what I could see. There are detailed descriptions on the site, however, regarding expectations. I would assume that Faculty roles would have some compensation attached.

"HSO is currently looking for global leaders to join its People Powered expert faculty. People Powered is an area of practice that is dedicated to providing products and services that enable organizations to activate people-centered care.

We are looking for patients, clinicians, health care leaders, academics, evaluation specialists and patient engagement leaders to work with us on an ad hoc basis. Click here for more information and to learn how to get involved!

We also invite you to share this opportunity with your network."

Will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

Hi Angela,

Thanks for passing that link on ~ I hadn't come across the "People Powered Expert Faculty" section.

I decided to email about the compensation piece and received a reply today saying if patients/families need extra support to participate, it would be evaluated on a case by case basis (although, all travel costs would be covered). I'm not exactly sure what this means and is not exactly a direct answer to the question. I was given another email address of someone at the organization if I wanted to find out further info. In any case, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the 'ask' of 7-10 hours/month of work for this opportunity ~ it just seems like a lot.

I also asked in my message to be added to their list of contacts as they mentioned they were looking for people on this page: https://www.hso.world/patients/

"HSO is currently building a list of national and international
contacts including individual patient partners, patient partnership
experts, and networks of individuals who share our passion for people
powered health. This list will be used to share updates related to
patient partnership opportunities and to be a source of information for
HSO about the work of others in the field.

We are inviting interested individuals and groups to submit an
expression of their interest with a short bio or description of your
mandate to mireille.brosseau@accreditation.ca."

I was for 4 years on the research management committee of a funding agency. They asked me to talk about the experience of being a citizen member at their annual conference my 2nd year. I added up all my time doing free work for them (I keep timesheets out of habit) and it added up to 31.5 8 hour working days -- basically a month and a half! They "joked" back to me that I shouldn't expect a cheque in the mail.

These commitments add up so you are right to be careful.

Wow, Alies! That's a lot of time! I wish there was some way to point out this ask is a lot for patients & maybe they need to reconsider the time commitment, especially with no pay. I think, despite being interested in this, I'm letting the technical committee go for now.

https://healthstandards.org/standards/technical-committees/recruitment/

They have now added that financial compensation will be offered to patients who will experience loss of income in participating on these committees, of which there are eight areas, covering everything from First Nations health to medication to home care.

It sounds like an interesting area to become involved in.

That's great, but to lose income you need to have an actual job I would think, or have to hire a replacement caregiver or babysitter.

I am retired and make a modest amount of money through being on research teams and advisory councils. It would be a stretch to say that any one activity would result in loss of income though, and one has to make a case for actual hardship.

Do you think that CPP counts as being on a pension?

Thanks, Amy, for the update. I was going to say the exact same thing as Annette -- if you don't have a job, but are on disability, you don't get paid? How do we convince them of the importance of offering an honorarium or something for patients??

Ok ~ I finally did it. I wrote a note expressing my concerns about the amount of time being asked of patients and honorarium. Will see where this goes.

Is there any news about HSO/Accreditation Canada's efforts to recruit patients/caregivers to various positions?

Does anyone know if these are still open?

Is there any resolution on the compensation issue? Alies

That's very sad. They make the effort to offer a hand and ask for help, and then what happens when you take the trouble to respond? Nothing.

Before I begin, I would like to say that I cherish my volunteer time; it is a very important aspect of my personal recovery and the decision to volunteer or ask for compensation is based on my own wellbeing. I am on a fixed income so there are limitations as to how much I can receive over the year but it doesn't stop me from accepting remuneration when it is offered.

Remuneration for time has always been a sore point with me although I have made some ground on getting compensation but I can't say that it's a living wage. The biggest barrier I come across is that the gov't and/or health care organization claim they do not have any policies on remuneration hence they cannot justify the compensation. With gov't oversight and limitations on this type of fiscal activity, it makes it very difficult for funds to be released to compensate us for our time and expertise, but I have made some progress. I have to give kudos to some who do recognize that some form of compensation is fair but to be honest, when I receive a $10 Tim Horton's gift card for a full 8 hour day, I get a little insulted. At times, it's better to get nothing than to get such a token "gift", but the intent there, it's the resources and policies that are lacking.

I always have to remind myself that this is new to many organizations (particularly those affected by the Patients First Act) and most are not prepared for this but many are learning and making adjustments to accommodate this need. We need to set a standard of payment though. I take the opportunity bring up compensation whenever it's appropriate (which is most of the time) and everyone agrees but little is being done. So what do we do?

These are my guidelines for accepting compensation for work. They aren't written is stone but work pretty well for me

If the organization pays for "expert guest speakers/lecturers" at an event, it is only fair that I be paid as well. My fees range from $250.00 for an hour presentation to $450.00 for a full day event. I have pretty good success with this. I consider myself a contractor for these types of events and expect to be paid in the same manner as any other speaker/lecturer.
Before I accept an offer to speak, I always ask about compensation and it usually begins a conversation of when and how much. If I find the recipient is open, I usually do the event as a volunteer but charge should I be asked to participate once again.
I've been fortunate enough to be in at the start of many committees and councils and this gives me the benefit of knowing what funding comes with the group. Compensation is not usually a line item but after the initial meeting, the organizers usually look for funds to compensate. My only point is that it be more than minimum wage (currently at $11.25/hr). This gives them an idea of how to much to increase their budget.
When remuneration is offered, I ensure that it be paid in a timely manner. For many, this is a new process and patience is needed for them to work out the logistics. I usually get compensated on the day of the event (if enough notice is given). I have recently waited for 3 months for the UHN to compensate me and this was very annoying because I know this is not new to them and a process is in place and yet, I had many hurdles to go over. This is the second time I have had to wait for them and have advised them I will no longer participate unless there is a guarantee of payment within 30 days.
When I advocate for remuneration, I insist that all patients and family members receive the same considerations else I do not accept the payment (and more often than not, the assignment). We are all in this together and it wouldn't be fair if I get payed, yet my colleagues do not.
When being compensated for work on a committee or working group, I always charge for my time to prepare for the meeting (reading documents, reports etc..) usually a half hour for every hour of the meeting (ex: 2 hour meeting would be 3 hours of hourly rate)
The hourly rate fluctuates depending on the size and scope of the agency and funders. I do a lot of work with small community groups and organizations (who have little money as it is) so my rate would change to ensure that I be able to participate rather than not having any patient or family member at the table at all. (The range is from $15/hr to $50/hr)

I hope these experiences help the conversation, we still have a long way to go though.

When I wrote about my concerns about this committee, I never received a reply back. I had also applied to be on their 'Expert patient faculty' and have not received any update recently regarding this. Thus far, I am not impressed with the lack of communication.

Thanks for all of the advice Claude. I was just part way through an email refusing an invitation to speak at a conference. It's far, inconvenient plus a lot of work to prepare a talk for no $$ at a for-profit conference.

I mentioned a few conversations back that I receive a per diem of $150 from the Government of Ontario as a lay member of the Council of a Regulated Health Professionals College.

The professional members receive $320 per day and receive $45 per hour for prep time. I am on an advisory board for another college and they feel it is fair to pay the patients at the same rate as the professionals. We are pleased to see that.

One way to ensure that in some way people who chose or are forced not to accept compensation are included, is to suggest a sum be donated to the charity or patient group of the patient's choice.

Wow, Claude! Thanks for sharing all of this. Sounds like you've really thought this through & have come up with a system that works for you.

Julie, I agree that if they value the expertise they should be paying. I do find that some of my more in depth and meaningful experiences take a relatively big time commitment. That is a problem for anyone who is working so how should we handle this?

With regard to HSO, I agree with your assessment that they are trying to do it right and should be supported.

We still have a long way to go to sort out the approaches to compensation for various activities so it is good to have this conversation. Thanks for jumping in. Alies

Agree with all the comments I've read and have been learning from the "school" of hard knocks, on-the-job! If we are asked to contribute our expertise, we should be paid. How else will policy makers, researchers etc.."learn" what they need to "know" in order to make improvements? Like the great comments here, I too, carefully evaluate the "project/assignment requests" I receive.

But I've been working for free in the health system for a long time. An "unpaid" caregiver in the health system for 14 years, I left my dearly loved career to care for my dearly loved dad, because of the dysfunction in the health system. I advocated for a senior (my dad) in many, many, many elements of the system and made sure he received the best possible treatments, from medical/health professionals. These were the "task/medical procedures I was not competent or, sufficiently knowledgeable to perform. However, I subsidized all the while the health system's health providers' deficiencies by providing/meeting the human dimension of care standards for patients - filling in the gaps in information, searching for options, working through, around the barriers, navigating the silos, searching for ideas, working in collaboration to problem solve, being the coordinator & integrator of dad's care. I was an extra employee, supplementing the number of staff available except, received no pay.

I had more than sufficient time to observe staff performance - especially providers abilities/inabilities to "demonstrate" respect/dignity, which "is observable", in both body language and communication skills (words, tone of voice, volume) as they carried out their medical, health related tasks. There were some "great" individuals. But, like patients, caregivers they too faced the gaps, barriers, silos, not of their creation, and like patients, caregivers, powerless to change.

While improving the processes, procedures, systems, policies, the health system must address their deficits in the "human dimension standards" of caregiving - those abilities called the "soft skills". These are EQUALLY important as the medical tasks of health care.

Those "initiating, leading" the improvements in health care, would not NEED patients and caregivers if they fully comprehended these TWO major intertwined elements of providing health care - the task & human skills, abilities, knowledge, attitude. If they had all this knowledge, understanding, our health system would be improved by now.

Through the projects we engage in (unless, we are independently wealthy) should of course, be compensated, "if" it is "valued" by the health system.

Standards Technical Committee 8 21 22

Standards Technical Committee

8

21

22