Background: Cultural competency has been espoused as an organizational strategy to reduce health disparities in care. Objective: To examine the relationship between hospital cultural competency and inpatient experiences with care. Research Design: The first model predicted Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores from hospital random effects, plus fixed effects for hospital cultural competency, individual race/ethnicity/language, and case-mix variables. The second model tested if the association between a hospital’s cultural competency and HCAHPS scores differed for minority and non-Hispanic white patients. Subjects: The National CAHPS Benchmarking Database’s (NCBD) HCAHPS Surveys and the Cultural Competency Assessment Tool of Hospitals Surveys for California hospitals were merged, resulting in 66 hospitals and 19,583 HCAHPS respondents in 2006. Measures: Dependent variables include 10 HCAHPS measures: 6 composites (communication with doctors, communication with nurses, staff responsiveness, pain control, communication about medications, and discharge information), 2 individual items (cleanliness and quietness of patient rooms), and 2 global items (overall hospital rating, and whether patient would recommend hospital). Results: Hospitals with greater cultural competency have better HCAHPS scores for doctor communication, hospital rating, and hospital recommendation. Furthermore, HCAHPS scores for minorities were higher at hospitals with greater cultural competency on 4 other dimensions: nurse communication, staff responsiveness, quiet room, and pain control. Conclusions: Greater hospital cultural competency may improve overall patient experiences, but may particularly benefit minorities in their interactions with nurses and hospital staff. Such effort may not only serve longstanding goals of reducing racial/ethnic disparities in inpatient experience, but may also contribute to general quality improvement.

Background: Prior studies have shown that racial/ethnic minorities have lower Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) scores. Perceived discrimination may mediate the relationship between race/ethnicity and patient experiences with care. Objective: To examine the relationship between perceived discrimination based on race/ethnicity and Medicaid insurance and CAHPS reports and ratings of care. Methods: The study analyzed 2007 survey data from 1509 Florida Medicaid beneficiaries. CAHPS reports (getting needed care, timeliness of care, communication with doctor, and health plan customer service) and ratings (personal doctor, specialist care, overall health care, and health plan) of care were the primary outcome variables. Patient perceptions of discrimination based on their race/ethnicity and having Medicaid insurance were the primary independent variables. Regression analysis modeled the effect of perceptions of discrimination on CAHPS reports and ratings controlling for age, sex, education, self-rated health status, race/ethnicity, survey language, and fee-for-service enrollment. SEs were corrected for correlation within plans. Results: Medicaid beneficiaries reporting discrimination based on race/ethnicity had lower CAHPS scores, ranging from 15 points lower (on a 0–100 scale) for getting needed care to 6 points lower for specialist rating, compared with those who never experienced discrimination. Similar results were obtained for perceived discrimination based on Medicaid insurance. Conclusions: Perceptions of discrimination based on race/ethnicity and Medicaid insurance are prevalent and are associated with substantially lower CAHPS reports and ratings of care. Practices must develop and implement strategies to reduce perceived discrimination among patients.

Background: Cultural competency or the ongoing capacity of health care systems to provide for high-quality care to diverse patient populations (National Quality Forum, 2008) has been proposed as an organizational strategy to address disparities in quality of care, patient experience, and workforce representation. But far too many health care organizations still do not treat cultural competency as a business imperative and driver of strategy. Purposes: The aim of the study was to examine the impact of a systematic, multifaceted, and organizational level cultural competency initiative on hospital performance metrics at the organizational and individual levels. Methodology/Approach: This demonstration project employs a pre–post control group design. Two hospital systems participated in the study. Within each system, two hospitals were selected to serve as the intervention and control hospitals. Executive leadership (C-suite) and all staff at one general medical/surgical nursing unit at the intervention hospitals experienced a systematic, planned cultural competency intervention. Assessments and interventions focused on three organizational level competencies of cultural competency (diversity leadership, strategic human resource management, and patient cultural competency) and three individual level competencies (diversity attitudes, implicit bias, and racial/ethnic identity status). In addition, we evaluated the impact of the intervention on diversity climate and workforce diversity. Findings: Overall performance improvement was greater in each of the two intervention hospitals than in the control hospital within the same health care system. Both intervention hospitals experienced improvements in the organizational level competencies of diversity leadership and strategic human resource management. Similarly, improvements were observed in the individual level competencies for diversity attitudes and implicit bias for Blacks among the intervention hospitals. Furthermore, intervention hospitals outperformed their respective control hospitals with respect to diversity climate. Practice Implications: A focused and systematic approach to organizational change when coupled with interventions that encourage individual growth and development may be an effective approach to building culturally competent health care organizations.

Background: There is a need for reliable and valid measures of cultural competence (CC) from the patient’s perspective. Objective: This paper evaluates the reliability and validity of the Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) CC item set. Research Design: Using 2008 survey data, we assessed the internal consistency of the CAHPS CC scales using the Cronbach α’s and examined the validity of the measures using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, multitrait scaling analysis, and regression analysis. Subjects: A random stratified sample (based on race/ethnicity and language) of 991 enrollees, younger than 65 years, from 2 Medicaid managed care plans in California and New York. Measures: CAHPS CC item set after excluding screener items and ratings. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis (Comparative Fit Index=0.98, Tucker Lewis Index=0.98, and Root Mean Square Error or Approximation=0.06) provided support for a 7-factor structure: Doctor Communication—Positive Behaviors, Doctor Communication—Negative Behaviors, Doctor Communication—Health Promotion, Doctor Communication—Alternative Medicine, Shared Decision-Making, Equitable Treatment, and Trust. Item-total correlations (corrected for item overlap) for the 7 scales exceeded 0.40. Exploratory factor analysis showed support for 1 additional factor: Access to Interpreter Services. Internal consistency reliability estimates ranged from 0.58 (Alternative Medicine) to 0.92 (Positive Behaviors) and was 0.70 or higher for 4 of the 8 composites. All composites were positively and significantly associated with the overall doctor rating. Conclusions: The CAHPS CC 26-item set demonstrates adequate measurement properties and can be used as a supplemental item set to the CAHPS Clinician and Group Surveys in assessing culturally competent care from the patient’s perspective.

The nursing home industry serves one of the most vulnerable populations, and its financial sustainability is a matter of public concern. However, limited empirical evidence exists on the impact of ownership and chain affiliation on nursing home financial performance. The aim of this study was to examine the joint effects of ownership and chain affiliation on the financial performance of the nursing home industry for the study period 1999-2004 on a national sample of 11,236 nursing homes per year. Data included the Medicare Cost Reports; the Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting file; and the Area Resource File. Dependent variables included operating and total margins. Independent variables included four ownership/chain affiliation combinations: for-profit chain, for-profit independent, not-for-profit chain, and not-for-profit independent. Random effects generalized least square regressions were performed. Results show that for-profit nursing homes delivered better financial performance than not-for-profit facilities did across both operating and total margins. However, the relationship between chain affiliation and financial performance was more nuanced. In the case of operating margin, chain-affiliated facilities delivered superior financial performance irrespective of ownership type; however, in the case of total margin, independents outperformed chain-affiliated facilities among for-profits. Our findings show an interactive effect of ownership and chain affiliation on nursing home financial performance, suggesting the pursuit of different organizational strategies by different ownership/chain affiliation subgroups (for-profit chain, for-profit independent, not-for-profit chain, and not-for-profit independent), with implications for financial performance. For-profit independent nursing homes managed to be the top performing group in terms of overall financial despite the operating financial advantage of for-profit chain-affiliated nursing homes. Similarly, not-for-profit independent nursing homes and not-for-profit chain homes had comparable overall financial performance despite the operating financial advantage of chain homes.

Background: The U.S. national standards for culturally and linguistically appropriate services (CLAS) in health care provide guidelines on policies and practices aimed at developing culturally competent systems of care. The Cultural Competency Assessment Tool for Hospitals (CCATH) was developed as an organizational tool to assess adherence to the CLAS standards. Purposes: First, we describe the development of the CCATH and estimate the reliability and validity of the CCATH measures. Second, we discuss the managerial implications of the CCATH as an organizational tool to assess cultural competency. Methodology/Approach: We pilot tested an initial draft of the CCATH, revised it based on a focus group and cognitive interviews, and then administered it in a field test with a sample of California hospitals. The reliability and validity of the CCATH were evaluated using factor analysis, analysis of variance, and Cronbach’s alphas. Findings: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses identified 12 CCATH composites: leadership and strategic planning, data collection on inpatient population, data collection on service area, performance management systems and quality improvement, human resources practices, diversity training, community representation, availability of interpreter services, interpreter services policies, quality of interpreter services, translation of written materials, and clinical cultural competency practices. All the CCATH scales had internal consistency reliability of .65 or above, and the reliability was .70 or above for 9 of the 12 scales. Analysis of variance results showed that not-for-profit hospitals have higher CCATH scores than for-profit hospitals in five CCATH scales and higher CCATH scores than government hospitals in two CCATH scales. Practice Implications: The CCATH showed adequate psychometric properties. Managers and policy makers can use the CCATH as a tool to evaluate hospital performance in cultural competency and identify and target improvements in hospital policies and practices that undergird the provision of CLAS.