View in EDS

Identifying Priorities for the Department of Veterans Affairs Strategic Plan: A Rapid Multi‐Method Evaluation.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Identifying Priorities for the Department of Veterans Affairs Strategic Plan: A Rapid Multi‐Method Evaluation.
Authors: Donnelly, John P.1,2,3 (AUTHOR) jpdonn@umich.edu, Vitous, C. Ann4,5 (AUTHOR), Burgan, Kaylee W.6 (AUTHOR), Yahya, Gezan M.1 (AUTHOR), Johnson, Jessica L.1 (AUTHOR), McDonald, Jessica A.1 (AUTHOR), Bowersox, Nicholas W.1,2,3,7 (AUTHOR), Kawentel, Linda M.1 (AUTHOR)
Source: Learning Health Systems. Apr2026, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p1-10. 10p.
Subject Terms: *Health services accessibility, *Evaluation methodology, *Qualitative research, Strategic planning, Veterans, Medical care, Veterans affairs offices, Information technology personnel
Company/Entity: United States. Dept. of Veterans Affairs
Abstract: Background: Understanding the priorities of patients and leaders can help organizations prepare for the future. This evaluation sought to generate actionable data on priorities in support of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) strategic plan, with priorities identified within the literature as well as among Veterans and VA leaders. Methods: A rapid qualitative evaluation was conducted, including a document analysis based on published information, focus groups with Veterans associated with research centers, and semi‐structured interviews with VA leaders. All data were analyzed using rapid qualitative methods, resulting in comprehensive templated descriptions of topics discussed and representative quotes. Summative content analysis was used to report frequencies and identify the most frequently mentioned priorities. Results: A total of 170 documents (e.g., academic/research articles, government publications) were analyzed. Seventeen Veteran focus groups (92 participants) and 26 semi‐structured interviews with VA leaders (representing 19 program offices) were conducted. There were differences in the most frequently mentioned priorities across sources, with none ranked in the top 5 for all. However, "Access and Continuity of Care," "Health Benefits," "Special Groups," and "Workforce" were among the top 10 mentioned within all sources. Among these, "Workforce" was most mentioned within the document analysis, whereas "Access and Continuity of Care" was most mentioned in focus groups. Both "Health Benefits" and "Access and Continuity of Care" were most mentioned during leadership interviews. Conclusions: Our findings suggest shared priorities to emphasize as VA looks to the future: improving care access, efficient and effective benefits processing, ensuring the needs of special Veteran groups are met, and sustaining an adequate workforce. However, further work should focus on understanding how Veterans and staff engage with the system to guide the investment of limited organizational resources. This work serves as an example of how rapid evaluation could be applied for strategic planning in other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Learning Health Systems is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 193281046
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Identifying Priorities for the Department of Veterans Affairs Strategic Plan: A Rapid Multi‐Method Evaluation.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Donnelly%2C+John+P%2E%22">Donnelly, John P.</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2,3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> jpdonn@umich.edu</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vitous%2C+C%2E+Ann%22">Vitous, C. Ann</searchLink><relatesTo>4,5</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burgan%2C+Kaylee+W%2E%22">Burgan, Kaylee W.</searchLink><relatesTo>6</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Yahya%2C+Gezan+M%2E%22">Yahya, Gezan M.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Johnson%2C+Jessica+L%2E%22">Johnson, Jessica L.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McDonald%2C+Jessica+A%2E%22">McDonald, Jessica A.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bowersox%2C+Nicholas+W%2E%22">Bowersox, Nicholas W.</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2,3,7</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kawentel%2C+Linda+M%2E%22">Kawentel, Linda M.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Learning+Health+Systems%22">Learning Health Systems</searchLink>. Apr2026, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p1-10. 10p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Health+services+accessibility%22">Health services accessibility</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+methodology%22">Evaluation methodology</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Qualitative+research%22">Qualitative research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Strategic+planning%22">Strategic planning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Veterans%22">Veterans</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+care%22">Medical care</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Veterans+affairs+offices%22">Veterans affairs offices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Information+technology+personnel%22">Information technology personnel</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectCompany
  Label: Company/Entity
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+States%2E+Dept%2E+of+Veterans+Affairs%22">United States. Dept. of Veterans Affairs</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background: Understanding the priorities of patients and leaders can help organizations prepare for the future. This evaluation sought to generate actionable data on priorities in support of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) strategic plan, with priorities identified within the literature as well as among Veterans and VA leaders. Methods: A rapid qualitative evaluation was conducted, including a document analysis based on published information, focus groups with Veterans associated with research centers, and semi‐structured interviews with VA leaders. All data were analyzed using rapid qualitative methods, resulting in comprehensive templated descriptions of topics discussed and representative quotes. Summative content analysis was used to report frequencies and identify the most frequently mentioned priorities. Results: A total of 170 documents (e.g., academic/research articles, government publications) were analyzed. Seventeen Veteran focus groups (92 participants) and 26 semi‐structured interviews with VA leaders (representing 19 program offices) were conducted. There were differences in the most frequently mentioned priorities across sources, with none ranked in the top 5 for all. However, "Access and Continuity of Care," "Health Benefits," "Special Groups," and "Workforce" were among the top 10 mentioned within all sources. Among these, "Workforce" was most mentioned within the document analysis, whereas "Access and Continuity of Care" was most mentioned in focus groups. Both "Health Benefits" and "Access and Continuity of Care" were most mentioned during leadership interviews. Conclusions: Our findings suggest shared priorities to emphasize as VA looks to the future: improving care access, efficient and effective benefits processing, ensuring the needs of special Veteran groups are met, and sustaining an adequate workforce. However, further work should focus on understanding how Veterans and staff engage with the system to guide the investment of limited organizational resources. This work serves as an example of how rapid evaluation could be applied for strategic planning in other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Learning Health Systems is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=193281046
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/lrh2.70068
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Health services accessibility
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Qualitative research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Strategic planning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Veterans
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Medical care
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Veterans affairs offices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Information technology personnel
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: United States. Dept. of Veterans Affairs
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Identifying Priorities for the Department of Veterans Affairs Strategic Plan: A Rapid Multi‐Method Evaluation.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Donnelly, John P.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vitous, C. Ann
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burgan, Kaylee W.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Yahya, Gezan M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Johnson, Jessica L.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McDonald, Jessica A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Bowersox, Nicholas W.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kawentel, Linda M.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Text: Apr2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 23796146
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 10
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Learning Health Systems
              Type: main
ResultId 1