Public Health Department Accreditation Implementation: Transforming Public Health Department Performance

Riley, William J.; Bender, Kaye; Lownik, Elizabeth

doi:10.2105/ajph.2011.300375

Cited by 51 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…25,26 A key initiative of this movement is public health department accreditation, which emphasizes continuous quality improvement to ensure effective delivery of public health services. 16,24 Similar to NCCCP performance measures, domains of accreditation include the use of evidence-based practices and conducting evaluation. 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.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…14 In public health, the Government Performance and Results Act from the 1990’s, and more recently CDC’s National Public Health Performance Standards Program and the public health department accreditation movement reflect efforts to improve programmatic performance. 9,15,16 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

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

“…Public Health Accreditation Board accreditation will also necessitate the development of a greater evidence base surrounding administrative practices to support the effectiveness and guide the revision and development of accreditation standards and measures. 46 The data that are developed regarding performance of health departments by the Public Health Accreditation Board may also provide an important source for examining the capacity, programs, process and outcomes of the public health process.…”

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

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

“…We selected 2 of these collaboratives, the Minnesota arm of the Multi-State Learning Collaborative-2 15 and the Building the Evidence Base Collaborative. 16 The Multistate Learning Collaborative (MLC) brought state and local health departments together with other stakeholders to improve public health services by implementing QI practices. 3 All of the projects from these 2 publically reported databases were included.…”

Section: Identification Of Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a Taxonomy for the Science of Improvement in Public Health

Riley

Lownik

Halverson

et al. 2012

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Public Health Department Accreditation Implementation: Transforming Public Health Department Performance

Cited by 51 publications

References 9 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

Developing a Taxonomy for the Science of Improvement in Public Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About