Pediatric Quality Measures Program (PQMP): Dissemination and Implementation of Child Health Quality Measures Cooperative Research Grants (U18) | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the Pediatric Quality Measures Program (PQMP) U18 grant opportunity (RFA HS 16 002)?

The Pediatric Quality Measures Program (PQMP): Dissemination and Implementation of Child Health Quality Measures Cooperative Research Grants (U18) (RFA HS 16 002) was a discretionary funding opportunity from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HHS-AHRQ). It focused on moving selected, newly developed pediatric quality measures into real-world use to improve child health care quality and address known gaps in measurement and quality improvement.

Which federal agency sponsored this funding announcement?

The sponsor was the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).

What type of funding mechanism was used?

The opportunity used a cooperative agreement mechanism (U18). Under a cooperative agreement, awardees are expected to work in active partnership with the federal sponsor rather than operating fully independently, typically involving ongoing collaboration, shared planning, and coordinated implementation activities.

What was the overall purpose of this program?

The purpose was practical and applied: to take a selected set of pediatric quality measures developed by PQMP Centers of Excellence and disseminate and implement them in real-world settings. The intent was to make these measures usable for accountability, performance monitoring, and continuous improvement in pediatric health systems, and to close known gaps where measurement has historically been weak.

Was the program focused on creating new measures or using existing ones?

The emphasis was on implementing a subset of already-developed PQMP Centers of Excellence measures, not on creating entirely new measures from scratch. The work centered on adoption, integration, testing, and sustained use in the field.

What does "dissemination and implementation" mean in this context?

In this program, dissemination and implementation referred to getting selected child health quality measures adopted and used by organizations that deliver, pay for, and oversee pediatric care. This includes figuring out practical approaches for integration into workflows, reporting systems, and decision-making, and learning what it takes for the measures to be used successfully and sustainably.

What kinds of real-world settings were intended for measure use?

The opportunity described real-world use cases such as Medicaid managed care, CHIP programs, health plan quality programs, and provider performance improvement initiatives. More broadly, it targeted settings where pediatric care is delivered, paid for, and overseen.

What were the targeted measures expected to address?

The targeted measures were intended to address key pediatric measurement and quality improvement gap areas. This signals a priority for areas where child health systems lacked strong, widely used metrics or where existing measures were not sufficiently driving improvement.

What was a defining feature of the expected project teams?

A defining feature was the requirement for multi-disciplinary partnership teams. Applications were expected to combine pediatric measure developers with quality improvement and health system experts, and include real implementing partners such as state Medicaid and CHIP programs, health plans, and provider-level organizations.

Who were considered "implementing partners" for this opportunity?

Implementing partners included organizations positioned to put measures into operational use, such as state Medicaid and CHIP programs, health plans, and provider-level organizations like health systems, hospitals, pediatric practices, or provider networks.

Why did the opportunity emphasize partnerships between developers, QI experts, and implementers?

The structure aimed to ensure the work was not purely academic. Measure developers help maintain fidelity to measure specifications, quality improvement experts support practical improvement approaches, and payers/providers help embed measures into routine operations, reporting workflows, and decision-making.

What other stakeholders were encouraged to be included?

The opportunity encouraged inclusion of other stakeholders as appropriate, such as families and caregivers, community-based organizations, health information technology partners, and entities involved in reporting and accountability.

What kinds of implementation barriers were projects expected to address?

The announcement highlighted barriers such as data availability, electronic health record extraction challenges, coding variation, workflow burden, and reporting infrastructure. Projects were expected to identify and address obstacles that prevent adoption and sustained use.

What kinds of activities would a typical project include under this cooperative research model?

Typical activities would include identifying where and how the measures could be used, integrating them into relevant programs or workflows, addressing barriers to uptake, and testing strategies that increase adoption and sustained use. Projects were also expected to generate practical implementation lessons and know-how that others could replicate.

What kinds of deliverables or transferable lessons were the program trying to generate?

The program emphasized producing implementation lessons that can be transferred to other states, plans, or provider organizations. Examples described include guidance on required data elements, feasible reporting approaches, training materials, stakeholder engagement methods, and understanding when and where a measure performs well and supports improvement rather than simply adding reporting burden.

How many awards were expected, and what was the maximum award amount?

AHRQ expected to make about 6 awards. The stated award ceiling was $675,000.

When was the opportunity posted, and what was the application deadline?

The opportunity was posted and created on April 22, 2016. The application closing date was June 28, 2016.

What funding category did the announcement fall under?

It fell under the health funding activity category.

What CFDA number(s) were associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity referenced CFDA 93.226 (and another listing in the source data), indicating it was cataloged under federal assistance listings related to health services research and quality improvement initiatives.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was listed broadly as "Others," with additional clarification referenced in the full eligibility text. This typically suggests that a range of institutions could potentially apply depending on the full announcement rules, often including universities, non-profits, research organizations, and sometimes state or local entities when participating as part of a partnership.

What was the practical impact AHRQ was aiming for with this grant program?

The practical aim was to speed the transition from measure development to real-world impact in pediatric care. By funding partner-heavy implementation projects involving Medicaid/CHIP and frontline delivery organizations, AHRQ aimed to ensure new pediatric quality measures would be used as tools for accountability, performance monitoring, and continuous improvement rather than remaining unused.

How does a cooperative agreement affect how the project would be managed?

Because it is a cooperative agreement, projects would be managed with active federal involvement. This generally means ongoing collaboration and coordinated implementation activities with the sponsor, rather than a model where funds are provided and the awardee proceeds entirely independently.