Tag Archives: swot

Academia, Health Care

Marketing Plans in Health Care

Health care marketing is interesting when considering military treatment facilities. Naval Hospital Pensacola, according to Ludvigsen and Carroll (2003), is limited in the scope and manner that administrators are allowed to use federal monies to fund marketing efforts. Since budget cuts forced many military installations to close, and with them the attached military treatment facilities, efforts have been made, through programs like Tricare, to redirect the military health care market to the civilian care providers; however, hospitals that remain in operation, such as Naval Hospital Pensacola, have found that their market share has decreased sharply over time.

Naval Hospital Pensacola developed a marketing plan in 2003 to address the 5,000 enrollment opportunities that were left vacant due to military restructuring and Tricare development.

About Naval Hospital Pensacola

Naval Hospital Pensacola, a 60 bed facility, is the second oldest Naval hospital. The services provided by Naval Hospital Pensacola are primarily primary care, but the facility also has five operating suites and also provides urology, orthopedics, obstetrics and gynecology, among other services and operates with a budget of $64.5-million (Ludvigsen & Carroll, 2003). Naval Hospital Pensacola’s pharmacy is said to be the fourth busiest in the Navy, according to Ludvigsen and Carroll (2003).

Marketing Naval Hospital Pensacola

Purpose

In order to analyze the potential for additional capacity, Naval Hospital Pensacola formed a committee whose recommendation was that an additional 5,000 enrollee capacity was possible. The hospital, at the time of the plan formulation, served approximately 19,000 enrollees. The Managed Care Department of Naval Hospital Pensacola then developed this marketing plan to answer the recommendations of the capacity committee. Additionally, “the hospital implemented a policy which requires TRICARE Prime enrollees moving within [Naval Hospital Pensacola’s] catchment area of 40 miles, to use [Naval Hospital Pensacola]” (Ludvigsen & Carroll, 2003, p. 1). This policy ensured that certain Tricare recipients must utilize services provided by the naval hospital and dissuaded them from using civilian services that other Tricare recipients were allowed to use. This policy, according to Ludvigsen and Carroll (2003), provided additional access to approximately 10,000 Tricare Prime recipients residing within the 40-mile catchment area of Naval Hospital Pensacola.

SWOT Analysis

The marketing plan (Ludvigsen & Carroll, 2003) provided internal and external analyses that showed staffing was adequate for the proposed growth and, unlike the civilian sector, the funding would be made available based on use as Naval Hospital Pensacola is a military treatment facility whose budget relies on enrollment and not on cost-savings. “Because [Naval Hospital Pensacola] derives its funds via Federal appropriations, [Naval Hospital Pensacola’s] administration does not experience the financial pressures that civilian counterparts face, and can focus on quality issues” (Ludvigsen & Carroll, 2003, p. 7). Additionally, Naval Hospital Pensacola relies on the concept of one-stop shopping for enrollee health care needs as a marketing strength.

However, the SWOT analysis detailed within Ludvigsen and Carroll’s (2003) marketing plan admits that the naval hospital suffers access of care issues as a main vulnerability. This, coupled with a broken promise image, allows three other area hospitals to fulfill this marketing void. “Effectively competing requires improving quality of care, creating access, improving facilities, providing amenities, and promoting these accomplishments” (p. 9). Examples of Federal legislation are provided to show the marketing disadvantages of military treatment facilities.

Objectives

The primary objective of the marketing plan (Ludvigsen & Carrol, 2003) is to increase enrollment by 5,000 Tricare Prime recipients, mainly within the internal medicine, family practice, and pediatric clinics. In order to be viewed as successful, the minimum additional enrollment must be 2,000 over the next two years, again targeting 5,000 additional enrollees.

Methods

The marketing plan (Ludvigsen & Carroll, 2003) of Naval Hospital Pensacola utilizes a combination of three models in order to focus the hospital efforts. The first model is the traditional marketing mix model detailed by four components: product, placement, pricing, and promotion. The second model, based on the hospital’s own consumer marketing studies, include four components, “the Four C’s” (p. 21): competence, convenience, communication, and compassion. The final model, based on the Institute of Medicine’s (2001) health care improvement aims and objectives, includes safety, efficacy, patient-centricity, timeliness, efficiency, and equity.

Using a matrix to match the qualities of each of the three models, criteria were developed to further synthesize the goals of the hospital, its marketing theory, and the expectations of the targeted health care consumers. Representation of this combined modeling, however, starts to confound the reader by unnecessary references to concepts of quantum physics. The model is concisely represented by three dimensional representation with patient-focus in the middle of a pyramid formed between product, access, efficiency, and promotion.

Discussion

Being a military treatment facility and being highly governed by Federal legislation, Naval Hospital Pensacola is not a typical health care organization. In order to market improved or underutilized services, the hospital requires a novel approach, which is outlined within the marketing plan of Ludvigsen and Carroll (2003).

Naval Hospital Pensacola does well to focus, first, on the strengths and weaknesses identified by internal and external analyses, then, developing a plan that exploits the strengths to develop a means of overcoming the identified weaknesses. By focusing on industry-accepted aims and objectives, Naval Hospital Pensacola demonstrates improvement in measurable areas to attract additional enrollment. It is important to note, however, that, being a military treatment facility, the hospital enjoys a rare advantage of being able to pass rules mandating enrollment of certain beneficiaries within the prescribed catchment area.

The plan is an effective means of overcoming certain identified obstacles. It is realistic, allowing for fail-soft situations (or, minimal standard improvement), and comprehensive plan that addresses a true marketing need for both the hospital and the target health care consumer.

References

Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Ludvigsen, S. M. & Carroll, W. D. (2003). Naval Hospital Pensacola marketing plan. Retrieved from http://www.tricare.mil/familycare/downloads/marketing_plan.pdf

Academia, Health Care, Technology

SWOT Analysis: Day Kimball Healthcare

Day Kimball Healthcare (DKH) is a non-profit health care organization serving the northeastern Connecticut, southcentral Massachusetts and northwestern Rhode Island communities. The mission of DKH (2011) is “to meet the health needs of our community through our core values of clinical quality, customer service, fiscal responsibility and local control” (para. 4). A comprehensive health care system, DKH offers primary care and a multitude of medical and surgical specialties along with sophisticated diagnostics by offering a comprehensive network of more than 1,000 employees including more than 200 physicians, surgeons and specialists. DKH is comprised of Day Kimball Hospital, four community health care centers, Day Kimball HomeCare, Day Kimball Hospice & Palliative Care of Northeastern Connecticut, Day Kimball HomeMakers, and Physician Services of Northeast CT, LLC.

Services

DKH provides a host of services to the community, including:

  • primary medical care,

  • emergency medical care,

  • surgical care,

  • palliative and hospice care,

  • home health care, and

  • social services

DKH appears to strive towards providing a comprehensive health care solution to the community that is robust, yet limited in specialty, especially critical care, trauma, and pediatric services.

Environment

Population

The primary catchment area for DKH includes the Connecticut towns of Brooklyn, Canterbury, Eastford, Killingly, Plainfield, Pomfret, Putnam, Sterling, Thompson, and Woodstock, and the Rhode Island towns of Foster and Glocester. According to the available U.S. Census data (2010), the population served is nearly 92,000 with average growth in the last ten years of nearly 9%. The median age of the catchment population (37.8) is merely 3 months older than the median age of the Connecticut population (37.4). The median household income is $66,422 (CT: $67,034).

Competition

DKH is the primary health care provider within the defined catchment area. Some of the population, however, rely on three other community-level hospitals, Backus Hospital (Norwich, CT), Southbridge Hospital (Southbridge, MA), and Windham Hospital (Windham, CT). Additionally, some of the population with advanced disease processes rely strictly on the primary and emergency care services of the nearest urban centers (Worcester, MA, Hartford, CT, and Providence, RI), with many of DKH’s emergency patients transferred to these tertiary care centers for trauma, critical care, and pediatric specialties.

Environment

DKH, as a health care organization, can be adversely affected by patterns of infectious diseases within the community. As each season mounts, the health care system becomes overwhelmed and requires coordination between other health care facilities in the area.

Additionally, a large disaster would strain the resources of DKH; however, this would be a temporary issue, resolving as the disaster winds down. There is ample opportunity within the catchment area for a disaster to unfold, including traffic on the major highway that divides the catchment area as well as the number of large manufacturing entities in the area.

Assessment

Strengths. DKH provides comprehensive long-term health care to community members. DKH enjoys a strong and comprehensive relationship with a large network of physicians and other primary care providers.

Weaknesses. DKH has no intensivists, physicians with expertise in critical care, and provides very limited critical care service. As a result, DKH must transfer many cases to other facilities to rule in or rule out critical illnesses or injuries, which negatively affects earnings.

Another weakness lies in DKH’s reliance on electronic patient care reporting. DKH uses a number of patient care reporting platforms that do not integrate with each other. This creates a need for over-redundancy and opportunities for patient care errors. Further, a fully integrated system would allow for health care partners to access up-to-date patient care information without delay.

Opportunities. Opportunities exist for DKH to expand their services by further decentralizing the current services offered and concentrating on which scopes of service to expand or improve upon. By improving laboratory reporting standards and facilitating full integration of patient reporting, patients of DKH will be able to obtain a more standardized level of care throughout the health care continuum.

DKH should cultivate their relationship with the public by being more active and visible within the community performing screenings, vaccinations, blood drives, as well as other public relations endeavors.

Another opportunity exists with the patient population who suffer from critical illness or injury that is yet to be determined. These patients face risk in transport to tertiary care centers when, often times, the transfer is unwarranted by later findings. By cultivating relationships with specialties in the tertiary care centers, these patients could be more fully determined to need (or, not need) transfer to tertiary care centers, keeping the financial reward of caring for patients in-house while obtaining specialist coordination.

Threats. The largest threat to DKH, as with any organization, is its reputation within the community. Funding, which is largely based on governmental and private insurance providers, is also a considerable threat that must be managed continuously. However, other threats are significant and can be actively managed.

Pandemics are unlikely to occur but present catastrophic scenarios if they do, indeed, occur. Pandemic influenza, as well as other pandemic diseases, presents a situation of an increasing need for awareness and preparation.

Unpredictable weather in the northeastern Connecticut presents a likely and significant threat to the provision of health care. Recent and historical storms have proven to impede access and egress to and from patients both out in the community and at the hospital.

Discussion

This SWOT analysis is limited by the a posteriori knowledge and perceptions of the author, a paramedic who is active within the health care system, and it is limited in the scope of an academic exercise to practice SWOT analyses.

However, DKH has overcome many adversities in the past and continues to grow, but seemingly without proper direction. The efforts thus far seem disjointed and without a clear structure or coherent path into the future. DKH would benefit from an internal SWOT analysis that could be performed without the limitations inherent herein.

References

Day Kimball Healthcare. (2011). Day Kimball Healthcare. Retrieved from http://www.daykimball.org

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 census data. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/