Information Technology Funding Research Articles

Using information technology to integrate tobacco use treatment in routine oncology care: Lessons learned from the U.S. Cancer Center Cessation Initiative Cancer Centers.

Cancer patients who receive evidence-based tobacco-dependence treatment are more likely to quit and remain abstinent, but tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) are not consistently offered. In 2017, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, through the Cancer Moonshot, funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). C3I supports 52 cancer centers to implement and expand evidence-based tobacco treatment in routine oncology care. Integration into routine care involves the use of health information technology (IT), including modifying electronic health records and clinical workflows. Here, we examine C3I cancer centers' IT leadership involvement and experiences in tobacco-dependence treatment implementation. This qualitative study of C3I-funded cancer centers integrated data from online surveys and in-person, semistructured interviews with IT leaders. We calculated descriptive statistics of survey data and applied content analysis to interview transcripts. Themes regarding IT personnel included suggestions to involve IT early, communicate regularly, understand the roles and influence of the IT team, and match program design with IT funding and resources. Themes regarding electronic health record (EHR) modifications included beginning modifications early to account for long lead time to make changes, working with IT to identify and adapt existing EHR tools for TTP or designing tools that will support a desired workflow developed with end-users, and working with IT personnel to make sure TTPs comply with system and state policies (e.g., privacy laws). The experiences of C3I cancer centers regarding the use of health IT to enhance tobacco-dependence treatment program implementation can guide cancer centers and community oncology practices to potentially enhance TTP implementation and patient outcomes.

Prioritization and Implementation of Information Technology Funding in Higher Education Institutions in the Philippines

Information Technology (IT) funding impacts the opportunities of the group as well as the opportunities of the entire organization. IT funding is among the top-ten IT issues in higher education institutions nowadays. The paper measured empirically the level of prioritization and degree of implementation of IT funding in higher education institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines. A total of 95 HEIs in the Philippines were evaluated. The respondents are all heads in the Management Information Technology units. A survey questionnaire was used that was based on the critical questions from EDUCAUSE. The study reveals that the level of prioritization of IT funding in the Philippine HEIs is high but the degree of implementation is moderate. The study shows that there is a significant positive relationship between degree of implementation of IT funding and level of technical skills possessed by the respondents. There is no significant positive relationship between degree of implementation of IT funding and the respondent’s gender, educational attainment, teaching status, human skill level, conceptual skill level, working status, extent of decision-making, and HEI’s internet bandwidth. It is concluded that there is a remarkable gap between the level of prioritization and degree of implementation of IT funding in these institutions.Keywords: IT in Education, IT funding, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), descriptive design, Philippines

Understanding and Evaluating IT Budgets and Funding

The average firm spends over two-thirds of the IT budget on maintaining the present infrastructure and architecture. The IT budget in turn makes up between thirty to fifty percent of the capital expenditure of a firm annually. An appreciation of the models would enhance an understanding of funding for new IT initiatives and/or making improved decisions on IT investments and operations. In an era where IT infrastructure is essential, a sound IT portfolio is important. This paper explores the necessities of maintaining a firm’s current IT health, investing in future capacity and improving the competitive position of the firm. This paper tries to suggest how an organization can shift from barely maintaining the current IT infrastructure, much to the chagrin of everyone involved, to an industry leading, value generating and sound IT infrastructure. This paper first examines four models for Budgeting and Funding for Information Technology in a firm (Charge Based, Lord and Master, Revenue Percentage, Absolute Outsourcing). Then it proceeds to develop a speculative framework to assist IT budget and funding. There is evidence that the first four models (Charge-based, Lord and Master, Revenue Percentage and Absolute Outsourcing). Charge-based is a model where the IT unit is treated outright as a service provider and paid for services implemented. In Lord and Master, a firm’s IT unit has absolute control over implementation and execution of IT services. Revenue Percentage is where the IT unit compete for budgets in the form of a percentage of the organization overall revenue/profits. Absolute Outsourcing is also a service-charge based system; the only difference being that there is no defined IT unit within firm. IT needs are outsourced to an IT firm outside of the organization and services rendered, charged back to the organization.The impact an IT department has, whatever model it uses to exist, on organizational activities is un-questionable. The study of these models will help firms gather knowledge as to where they stand and also analyze if they need a change in their IT related financial environment. The proposed models are evaluated on: how each model works, how much is allocated as an IT budget, how the financial relationship of IT with other departments and stake holders functions, and implications on organizational learning. Using the funding and budgeting models as building blocks future research is welcomed on governance, change management as well as operational, day to day practical decision making which has relevance to both academic and practitioners.

Understanding and Evaluating IT Budgets and Funding

The average firm spends over two-thirds of the IT budget on maintaining the present infrastructure and architecture. The IT budget in turn makes up between thirty to fifty percent of the capital expenditure of a firm annually. An appreciation of the models would enhance an understanding of funding for new IT initiatives and/or making improved decisions on IT investments and operations. In an era where IT infrastructure is essential, a sound IT portfolio is important. This paper explores the necessities of maintaining a firm’s current IT health, investing in future capacity and improving the competitive position of the firm. This paper tries to suggest how an organization can shift from barely maintaining the current IT infrastructure, much to the chagrin of everyone involved, to an industry leading, value generating and sound IT infrastructure. This paper first examines four models for Budgeting and Funding for Information Technology in a firm (Charge Based, Lord and Master, Revenue Percentage, Absolute Outsourcing). Then it proceeds to develop a speculative framework to assist IT budget and funding. There is evidence that the first four models (Charge-based, Lord and Master, Revenue Percentage and Absolute Outsourcing). Charge-based is a model where the IT unit is treated outright as a service provider and paid for services implemented. In Lord and Master, a firm’s IT unit has absolute control over implementation and execution of IT services. Revenue Percentage is where the IT unit compete for budgets in the form of a percentage of the organization overall revenue/profits. Absolute Outsourcing is also a service-charge based system; the only difference being that there is no defined IT unit within firm. IT needs are outsourced to an IT firm outside of the organization and services rendered, charged back to the organization.The impact an IT department has, whatever model it uses to exist, on organizational activities is un-questionable. The study of these models will help firms gather knowledge as to where they stand and also analyze if they need a change in their IT related financial environment. The proposed models are evaluated on: how each model works, how much is allocated as an IT budget, how the financial relationship of IT with other departments and stake holders functions, and implications on organizational learning. Using the funding and budgeting models as building blocks future research is welcomed on governance, change management as well as operational, day to day practical decision making which has relevance to both academic and practitioners.

Building the Information Bridge to Cross the Quality Chasm

commentary FRONTIERS RICHARD SKINNER AND Alden Solovy and Chaiken and Barry Chaiken have wrestled with one of toughest questions in healthcare. For sheer complexity, attempting to measure value of information technology (IT)-and to satisfy anxieties of chief executive officers, other executive team members, and boards of trustees when they are contemplating major in IT-ranks somewhere just below decoding human genome. Serving as a member of Institute of Medicine's (10M) Committee on Quality of Healthcare in America (the committee that published To Err is Human in 2000 and Crossing Quality Chasm in 2001), I was frustrated to find that so little had been done to establish methods and compile measurements of value of IT in healthcare. The 10M committee concluded that two most important strategies for improving quality of healthcare in United States will be to make massive increases in IT and to revamp reimbursement for care. We wrote (10M 2001): The committee believes information technology must play a central role in redesign of health care system if a substantial improvement in quality is to be achieved over coming decade. Automation of clinical, financial, and administrative transactions is essential to improving quality, preventing errors, enhancing consumer confidence in health system, and improving efficiency. We recognized that new funding for IT would be necessary to accomplish national goals for connectivity and quality improvement, and we recommended federal funding to supplement existing health delivery system IT spending. In response to a request by Secretary Tommy Thompson of Department of Health and Human Services last year, ioM has just released a further report that calls for federal dollars to support regional demonstrations of key advances in IT infrastructure and connectivity (10M 2002). All of these recommendations were made because, as a practical matter, no traction will be gained on quality improvement and efficiency without significant advances in healthcare IT. However, in all of our discussions with health system leaders and our review of literature, we found no clear answer to two very basic questions: 1. What types of in IT will produce most value for health delivery systems? 2. Are these same that will produce value for patients, consumers, and nation? National policy shares much same problem that executive teams and boards of trustees face at individual delivery system level. Skinner and Solovy and Chaiken have provided valuable assistance by suggesting two fundamental and reasonably complementary approaches to these questions. Both begin with observation that return on investment (ROI) analyses for IT are undergoing a revolution in every sector of economy. In healthcare, as in other sectors, this turmoil is exacerbated by painful experiences of previous investments. From perspective of healthcare cEos, according to Solovy and Chaiken, the past two decades have been littered with broken promises and increasing costs. As Skinner notes, IT that have greatest potential yield are those that go to heart of business, improving core functions and directly affecting consumers and physicians in front-office systems, with goals of increasing market share or offering new products. Instead of automating old work processes, they disrupt these processes and make new solutions possible. However, these are also riskiest investments, as Skinner sees in many examples of catastrophic failures in ERP and CRM investments in other industries. Ultimately, Skinner points out, the ... measures of IT's contribution to business value are same metrics used to measure business in general. An investment must: 1. build productivity, 2. …

Cost accounting a network ‐ a case study

Regardless of how they are budgeted, information technology (IT) costs must be paid. Most schools offer some computing services at no cost to the individual or unit and some that are charged back to users and units. Typically, common good services are centrally funded, and services that differentially benefit specific individuals or units are charged for. How services are funded often reflects a school’s philosophy about IT and about finances. Preferably, IT funding mechanisms deliberately help shape and influence an institution’s IT and services philosophy, as opposed to an IT or service philosophy being unintentionally shaped by fiscal policies that follow no particular strategy. Levying fees to users on an individual or departmental basis may yield a different demand and expectation of IT services than when costs are borne by a central budget. Quantity and quality, degree of centralization, and administrative complexity of services are major variables in determining funding. Also at stake is the degree to which an institution wishes to endorse, suppress, control or expand IT services. These issues are specifically illustrated through a case study of the formulation of a new budget and cost accounting model to both finance an institution‐wide network upgrade and to maintain that network.