Local Public Health System Performance and Community Health Outcomes

Ingram, Rick E.; Scutchfield, F. Douglas; Charnigo, Richard; Riddell, Martha C.

doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.022

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Emerging evidence suggests that local health departments who perform better at the core public health functions may have an increased impact on some community health outcomes. 27 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Does a Performance Measurement System Tell Us About the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program?

Townsend

Moore

Mulder

et al. 2015

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) performance measurement system seeks to understand both the processes that funded programs undertake with their respective coalitions to implement the objectives of their cancer plans and outcomes of those efforts. Objective To identify areas of achievement and technical assistance needs of NCCCP awardees. Design Program performance was assessed through surveys completed by program directors on performance indicators in 2009 and 2010 and queries from a web-based management information system in 2011 and 2012. Setting Programs funded by CDC’s NCCCP. Participants 69 programs. Main Outcome Measure(s) The key performance measures assessed were: inclusion of diverse partners and key sectors in cancer coalitions; partners’ involvement in activities; receiving in-kind resources from partners; using evidence-based interventions and data for setting priorities; conducting program evaluation; using community- or organization-level strategies to address cancer control efforts; and demonstrating progress toward achieving health outcomes. Results Most programs reported having active coalitions that represent diverse organizational sectors. Nearly all programs routinely assess the burden of cancer. In-kind resources to implement activities peaked at $64,716 in the second year of a five year funding cycle, and declined in subsequent project years. By year 3, over 70% of programs reported having an evaluation plan. While programs reported that nearly two-thirds of their interventions were evidence-based, some programs implemented non-evidence-based interventions. A majority of programs successfully used at least one community- or organization-level change strategy. However, many programs did not incorporate objectives linked to health outcomes as they reported progress in implementing interventions. Conclusions: While NCCCP programs were strong at building and maintaining infrastructure, some programs may need additional technical assistance to increase the adoption of evidence-based interventions, develop solid and responsive evaluation plans, and better link efforts to population-based measures that demonstrate impact toward reducing the burden of cancer.

show abstract

“…Emerging evidence suggests that local health departments who perform better at the core public health functions may have an increased impact on some community health outcomes. 27 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Does a Performance Measurement System Tell Us About the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program?

Townsend

Moore

Mulder

et al. 2015

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, little research has examined the relationship between health system performance and activities on health outcomes, outside of a few examples. [40][41][42][43][44] Building the evidence base surrounding the effect of public health system inputs on health outcomes would help public health agencies use efficiency to inform, not drive their efforts, and allow them to target their efforts and resources toward improving specific health outcomes that are most relevant to their communities.…”

Section: Information and Communication Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Health Systems and Services Research: Building the Evidence Base to Improve Public Health Practice

Scutchfield

Ingram

2013

Public Health Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public health services and systems research (PHSSR) is the American designation for a field that uses a number of research disciplines and perspectives to examine the organization of public health systems, how they are financed, how they deliver public health services, the quality and costs of services they deliver, and the impact of variations in all these areas on population health; it is closely related to health services research (HSR), and uses many of the same methods as HSR. This article traces the developmental path of PHSSR, identifies organizations that have been critical in its growth, provides examples of PHSSR that demonstrate the potential it has to improve public health practice, and discusses the future of PHSSR and the use of PHSSR to influence public policy. While there have been sporadic attempts to examine the public health system in the United States since the early 20 th century, PHSSR has only been a formally recognized area of scientific inquiry since the early 2000s. PHSSR has experienced rapid growth, and evolved from mainly descriptive research to inferential research, and towards yielding results that suggest causation rather that correlation. While PHSSR as a field shows great promise to improve public health practice, in order for it to fulfill that promise it is vital that PHSSR produce results that are of use to the practice and policy making communities.

show abstract

“…Wide variation in demographic factors exists between counties in Kentucky, but the state can be classified largely rural 9 and has a high percentage of population living in poverty. 2,4 While LPHAs are mandated by the state and federal governments to perform many of the same services, nonrestricted funding (primarily local tax dollars) allows LPHAs the flexibility to provide additional services. 7,[11][12][13] This is of particular interest, given the evidence that suggests that public health system performance may be associated with health outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship Between Local Public Health Agency Administrative Variables and County Health Status Rankings in Kentucky

Harris

Scutchfield

Heise

et al. 2014

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For many years, public health in Kentucky has measured the number of clinical visits and other LPHA services but failed to determine specific characteristics and variables that influence community health status. This study suggests that LPHAs in Kentucky can advance public health practice by having well-educated directors, giving annual incremental raises, and utilizing the agency reserve funds to meet budget shortfalls in the short run. Furthermore, LPHAs with an associated home health agency may need to reassess their impact and need in their community, considering the negative effect it may have on county health status.

show abstract

Local Public Health System Performance and Community Health Outcomes

Cited by 31 publications

References 17 publications

What Does a Performance Measurement System Tell Us About the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program?

What Does a Performance Measurement System Tell Us About the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program?

Public Health Systems and Services Research: Building the Evidence Base to Improve Public Health Practice

The Relationship Between Local Public Health Agency Administrative Variables and County Health Status Rankings in Kentucky

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About