Liza C. Corso

Public Health Systems Research: Setting a National Agenda

The Institute of Medicine has recommended that policy decisions about improvement of national public health systems be guided by sound scientific evidence. However, to date there is no national research agenda to help guide public health systems. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was called upon to lead a collaborative consensus-based process to define key research questions and establish a framework to create opportunities to better coordinate, leverage, and identify public health resources, which are increasingly scarce. The public health systems research agenda that emerged from this process has 14 over-arching priority research themes. This national agenda should stimulate and guide research to meet the urgent need to improve the nations public health systems.

Defining quality improvement in public health.

Many industries commonly use quality improvement (QI) techniques to improve service delivery and process performance. Yet, there has been scarce application of these proven methods to public health settings and the public health field has not developed a set of shared principles or a common definition for quality improvement. This article discusses a definition of quality improvement in public health and describes a continuum of quality improvement applications for public health departments. Quality improvement is a distinct management process and set of tools and techniques that are coordinated to ensure that departments consistently meet the health needs of their communities.

Using the essential services as a foundation for performance measurement and assessment of local public health systems.

Efforts are under way to develop a performance measurement monitoring system for state and local public health systems and to develop a strategic planning tool for local public health systems. The development of these measures is being based on the Essential Public Health Services. This article provides the rationale for why the Essential Services offer a good framework for identifying, analyzing, and evaluating public health activities. The article also reviews the history of local public health and the development and application of the Essential Public Health Services and their predecessor frameworks such as the core functions, the organizational practices, and the essential elements.

Developing national performance standards for local public health systems.

Since the beginning of the 1990s, public health has struggled to measure its performance and capacity to carry out the core functions of public health practice, while facing increasing challenges within the ever-changing landscape of healthcare delivery, bioterrorism response, emerging infections, and other threats to the publics health. The article describes the development of a set of national performance standards for measuring how effectively public health systems deliver the 10 Essential Public Health Services. The standards were developed through a practice-driven approach that incorporated comprehensive field testing and iterative revisions. The standards represent a national consensus framework for measuring important aspects of public health practice.

Public Health Department Accreditation: Setting the Research Agenda

Health department accreditation is one of the most important initiatives in the field of public health today. The Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) is establishing a voluntary accreditation system for more than 3000 state, tribal, territorial, and local health departments using domains, standards, and measures with which to evaluate public health department performance. In addition, public health department accreditation has a focus on continuous quality improvement to enhance capacity and performance of health departments in order to advance the health of the population. In the accreditation effort, a practice-based research agenda is essential to build the scientific base and advance public health department accreditation as well as health department effectiveness. This paper provides an overview of public health accreditation and identifies the research questions raised by this accreditation initiative, including how the research agenda will contribute to better understanding of processes underlying the delivery of services by public health departments and how voluntary accreditation may help improve performance of public health departments.

The national public health performance standards: driving quality improvement in public health systems.

Since its inception in 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions National Public Health Performance Standards Program (NPHPSP) has helped lay the groundwork for public health quality improvement (QI) activities at the state and local levels. This article describes how the NPHPSP has promoted QI through its instruments and guidance and how it has continually strengthened the focus on QI over the years. The NPHPSP Version 2 instruments and enhanced guidance have been designed to more strongly reinforce QI and catalyze the transition from assessment to action. Despite positive reports from some state and local users that emphasize the value the NPHPSP holds for those that do successfully move forward with improvement actions, 2005 evaluation results from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials and the National Association of County and City Health Officials indicated challenges in transitioning the assessments results into performance improvement. More recent data are promising; a 2009 postassessment survey of early Version 2 respondents indicates that the majority (75% of all respondents) report action in one or more performance improvement steps. The NPHPSP has played an important role in fostering QI in many states and local jurisdictions. Furthermore, its experiences and lessons learned in supporting QI have helped to pave the way for other initiatives, such as the emerging national accreditation system for state and local health departments.

Incentives to Encourage Participation in the National Public Health Accreditation Model: A Systematic Investigation

OBJECTIVES We sought to identify the incentives most likely to encourage voluntary participation in the national public health accreditation model. METHODS We reviewed existing incentives, held meetings with key informants, and conducted a survey of state and local public health agency representatives. The survey was sent to all state health departments and a sample of local health departments. Group-specific differences in survey responses were examined. RESULTS Survey response rates were 51% among state health department representatives and 49% among local health department representatives. Both state health department and local health department respondents rated financial incentives for accredited agencies, financial incentives for agencies considering accreditation, and infrastructure and quality improvement as important incentives. State health department respondents also indicated that grant administration and grant application would encourage their participation in the national accreditation model, and local health department respondents also noted that technical assistance and training would encourage their participation. CONCLUSIONS Incentives to encourage participation of state and local agencies in the national voluntary accreditation model should include financial support as well as support for agency infrastructure and quality improvements. Several initiatives are already under way to support agency infrastructure and quality improvement, but financial support incentives have yet to be developed.

Quality improvement and performance: CDC's strategies to strengthen public health.

Within the context of health reform, the Obama administration’s ambitious goal of integrating prevention, public health, and healthcare delivery systems anticipates greatly expanding prevention and wellness activities as the primary means to reduce the burden of disease, injury, and disability in the United States. This prescription for change represents a significant challenge. If public health is to succeed in delivering on the “promise of prevention,” as well as exert our leadership role, then we need to counter with bold initiatives that promote accountability, performance, and improvements in public health. The reason is clear— without a high-performing public health system, we will not be able to attain the goals of the new administration and, most important, the health aspirations of communities across the nation. In addressing this challenge, we believe that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has an opportunity to expand its programs and activities to help transform our public health system. Quality improvement (QI), the focus of this issue of Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, can be the critical component that combines knowledge and guidance with the tremendous energy and talent of public healthcare practitioners to achieve program, organizational, and system goals. The principles of QI are embedded in several significant and highly visible programs supported by the CDC. The National Public Health Performance Standards Program (NPHPSP), the emerging national program for accreditation, environmen-

A study of incentives to support and promote public health accreditation.

CONTEXT Accreditation of public health agencies through the Public Health Accreditation Board is voluntary. Incentives that encourage agencies to apply for accreditation have been suggested as important factors in facilitating participation by state and local agencies. OBJECTIVE The project describes both current and potential incentives that are available at the federal, state, and local levels. DESIGN Thirty-nine key informants from local, state, tribal, federal, and academic settings were interviewed from March through May 2012. Through open-ended interviews, respondents were asked about incentives that were currently in use in their settings and incentives they thought would help encourage participation in Public Health Accreditation Board accreditation. RESULTS Incentives currently in use by public health agencies based on interviews include (1) financial support, (2) legal mandates, (3) technical assistance, (4) peer support workgroups, and (5) state agencies serving as role models by seeking accreditation themselves. Key informants noted that state agencies are playing valuable and diverse roles in providing incentives for accreditation within their own states. Key informants also identified the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other players, such as private foundations, public health institutes, national and state associations, and academia as providing both technical and financial assistance to support accreditation efforts. CONCLUSIONS State, tribal, local, and federal agencies, as well as related organizations can play an important role by providing incentives to move agencies toward accreditation.

Developing the MAPP community health improvement tool.

From 1997 to 2001, the National Association of County and City Health Officials, in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions Public Health Practice Program Office, developed a new community strategic planning tool, titled Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships (MAPP). This article provides a chronological description of the development of MAPP, devoting significant attention to pivotal decisions, development milestones, and distinguishing features of this new public health planning tool. All phases of the development ensured a practice-driven process, ongoing substantive input from the field, careful attention to research and literature, and intentional linkage with related efforts. This deliberate process laid the foundation for a tool that is not only well grounded in research and concepts but also relevant for practical use in communities. The process also demonstrates how practice-based research can be conducted in a way that effectively balances the need for applied relevance with intellectual integrity.