Accreditation

Greeley Reflections

Accreditation Connection, March 22, 2010

Issues surrounding the PPR

Part 3 of 3

Keep things simple as elaborate new processes may set up the facility to fail as being not attainable or unsustainable. Simplifying the process usually means reducing the efforts rather than adding more to them. Try to find ways that are part of the natural process of performing everyday tasks that can be used with minimal alteration to fit the standard requirements.

For facilities that use the on-site PPR instead of the electronic submission, embrace the survey as an opportunity to learn from the surveyor. Ask questions of the surveyor about ways that they have seen other facility’s reach compliance on areas in which you feel you are struggling.

Use this time to gauge the organization’s survey readiness and establish changes that may need to occur to have the triennial survey run smoothly in the future.

As an aside, at the fall 2009 Executive Briefings, The Joint Commission announced that it was looking at a complete revision of the PPR process. At that time, it was stated that the PPR could involve the organization having an option of an on-site visit from The Joint Commission or conducting a telephone call with the account representative and a member of the Standards Interpretation Group. A “touch points” concept was being explored proposing intervals of 6 months and the 18 month mark. The existing laborious process of filling out the PPR would then be eliminated as a requirement. The touch point PPR process was in draft stages at the time. This revision seems to have been put on the back burner by The Joint Commission, so the current PPR process remains in effect for now.

Most Popular

Related Articles