1. Benchmarking
Survey Working
Group Update
Presented by
Heather Guerrero, MA, CCMEP
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Karen Dzenko, Boehringer-Ingelheim

2. Benchmarking Survey Working Group
Beth
Page, Lilly
Karen
Dzenko, Boe
hringer-
Ingelheim
Co-chairs
Riaz Baxamusa, Astellas
Kristan Cline, NPS Pharmaceuticals
Jill Erickson, Takeda
Heather Guerrero, Gilead Sciences
Patty Jassak, Astellas, (IACE Lead
Elect)
Pamela Mason, AstraZeneca
April Pond, Talecris
Janet Moga – Genentech
Julia Shklovskaya – Takeda
Nancy Santilli – Independent
Contractor
Members
IACE and
ACEHP
Leadership
Jason Singer, IACE
Lead, Lilly
Christine Amorosi
RN MHSA,
Division Director -
Quality &
Innovation

3. Survey Content
- Department Scope and Budgets
- Grant Review and Approval Process
- Nature of Interactions with Providers
- Educational Value
- Future Trends
IME Focus Areas Ranked Important to PACME
Leadership

4. Developing the Survey
2009
• 6 organizations represented on Working Group
• Identified need to benchmark practices and processes related to Industry funding of educational
grants as a framework for future surveys
Design
• Survey Development (Spring 2009-Spring 2010)
• Questions for each focus area were developed, reviewed and revised for clarity and accuracy
• Survey was beta-tested by the PACME Leadership Group and refined
• Survey consisted of 53 questions – and required approx. 45 minutes to complete
Today
• 12 organizations represented on Working Group
• Same survey dissemination process as in 2009
•Survey link was sent to one key individual per organization from the IACE (formerly PACME)
membership list
•Three reminder notices sent to distribution list
•Anonymity guaranteed through use of Zoomerang (now Survey Monkey) platform

5. What the BWG Has Delivered
• Inaugural year of the Benchmarking Insights in 2013
• Almanac publications in 2012 and 2013
• Policy and Medicine communication February 2014
• Annual survey since 2010
• Two additional surveys focusing on monitoring and
outcomes in 2011
• 8 presentations
• Presented at the IACE Summit, Task Force, CME
Congress and CBI
Presentations
Surveys
Publications

6. New Look and Feel to Insights
Report

7. How Does Your Organization Use
this Data?
0 2 4 6 8
Outcomes
Grant review cycle
Grants
Resource/staffing
Value CME
Budget
RFP/CGA
Monitoring
Process/SOP 67% improve
organizational process
29% validate
organizational process
14% compare against
other companies

8. Free Text Response Answering How
Survey Respondents Utilized the Data
2013 Survey
“Organization data was compared against the benchmarking data;
improved grant processes to reflect majority of industry.”
“Validates some thinking on areas (ie budgeting, processes).”
“Staffing; evolution of department’s roles and responsibilities.”
“Add monitoring. Increased outcomes expectations. Expand scope of
reporting.”
“Confirm processes to ensure validation of activities within our
organization across the industry.”
“Use of RFPs including information to be included on RFPs and posting
options.”
“We use the data internally to champion the value of CME message, justify
additional resources, and to benchmark processes (like monitoring) within
industry. Its a very valuable tool!”

9. Using the Data
• Insights from Karen and Heather and how their
organizations use the data from the survey
• Any input from the attendees about ways they have
used the data in their organization?
• Any future topics you would like to see addressed?
Discussion
Case Studies

10. Deeper Dive in the 2014 Survey
Grants
review
committee
New topic
• Open Payment
• Satellite symposia
• Single support /multiple support
• RFP/CGA
• Change of scope
• Monitoring
• Outcomes
Topics Explored at Greater Depth

11. For More Information About Survey
Participation or a Copy of the
Benchmarking Report
hguerrero@gilead.com
Text to: 281-660-3794
Device companies to be added to survey
recipients
Pharma companies to be added to
survey recipients
Update contact information
Questions or
suggestions