Transcript Document

Public Health
Accreditation Board
Public Feedback
Feedback
on the Draft
on
Standards
Draft
Standards
Insert
name,
date,
affiliation
Insert
name,
date,
affiliation, PHAB affiliation
Goals of Today’s Session
Why Participate in Today’s Discussion?
• To help improve the standards and measures
Today’s Agenda
• Present overview of accreditation standards
development
• Seek input on standards
• Direct participants to provide additional details using
online or paper surveys
We need to hear from YOU!
Voluntary Accreditation Goal
The goal of a voluntary national accreditation
program is to improve and protect the health of
the public by advancing the quality and
performance of state and local public health
departments.
Exploring Accreditation Final Report, p. 4
Benefits of Accreditation
Accountability
& credibility
Tool for
improvement
Highlights
HD strengths
Accreditation
Greater
collaboration
Team building
Better
understanding of
public health
Recognition &
validation
Public Health Accreditation Board
• Established May 2007 in Alexandria, VA
• Governed by state and local public health
officials and board of health members
• Health department involvement:
o Board of Directors representation
o Workgroups oversee development
o Volunteer opportunities
Funding Partners
Eligible Applicants
All variations of state, local, tribal and territorial
health departments can apply for national
accreditation
PHAB Timeline
2008
2009
2010
2007
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
2011
1
2
3
4
Internal
Operations
Standards and
Measures
Assessment
Process
18 Month Beta Test
Applications
Beta Test
• Late summer 2009
• Approximately
– 8 State Health Agencies
– 24 Local Health Departments
• Benefits to participation detailed in call for
interested health departments
• No accreditation status
Standards Development Workgroup
Workgroup members - state & local HD leaders and BOH
members
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leah Devlin (NC): Co-Chair
Carol Moehrle (ID): Co-Chair
Terry Allan (OH)
Rex Archer (MO)
Tim Callahan (CT)
Rick Danko (TX)
Robert Fulton (MN)
John Gwinn (OH)
Mary Kushion (MI)
Richard Morrissey( KS)
Rita Parris (NE)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sylvia Pirani (NY)
Joy Reed (NC)
Stephen Ronck (OK)
Jane Smilie (MT)
Torney Smith (WA)
Bonita Sorenson (CA)
Jeffrey Stoll (CO)
Susan Turner (FL)
Kathy Vincent (AL)
Harvey Wallace (MI)
Christina Welter (IL)
Barbara Worgess (AZ)
Collaborative, consensus, iterative process
Facilitated by consultant with standards development
expertise - MCPP Healthcare Consulting, Inc
Standards and Measures Development
• Develop standards for all health
departments
• Measures specific to local and state health
departments
• Guidance for documentation and
demonstration of department performance
on meeting standards and measures
• Scoring and weighting methodology
Standards and Measures: Principles
• Advance the collective practice
• Be simple, reduce redundancy
• Minimize burden
• Reinforce local and state health departments’ roles,
demonstrate shared accountability
• Apply to all sizes and all forms of governance structure
• Based on American National Standards Institute principles
Principles continued
• Based on a body of existing work
o
o
o
o
o
Essential PH Services
NACCHO Operational Definition
National Public Health Performance Standards Program
State Experiences
ASTHO Survey Data
• Essentially all of the concepts in the Operational
Definition and NPHPSP have been addressed
Standards Development Timeline
Draft standards and measures
developed by workgroups
Feb 08-Feb 09
Alpha test/desk review
Oct 08-Nov 08
Public vetting
Feb 09-April 09
Revised based on feedback
May 09-June 09
PHAB Board approval
July 09
Beta testing
Late Summer 09Nov 10
Draft Standards Framework
11 Domains
31 Standards
>100 Measures
Documentation
Eleven Domains
Part A
Administrative Capacity and Governance
Part B
1. Conduct assessment activities focused on population
health status and health issues facing the community
2. Investigate health problems and environmental
public health hazards to protect the community
3. Inform and educate about public health issues and
functions
4. Engage with the community to identify and solve
health problems
Eleven Domains (cont.)
5. Develop public health policies and plans
6. Enforce public health laws and regulations
7. Promote strategies to improve access to
healthcare services
8. Maintain a competent public health workforce
9. Evaluate and continuously improve processes,
programs, and interventions
10. Contribute to and apply the evidence base of
public health
Domain 1: Conduct assessment activities focused on population
health status and health issues facing the community
Standard 1.1 B: Collect and Maintain
Population Health Data
Collect and maintain reliable, comparable, and valid data that provide
information on conditions of public health importance and on the health
status of the population.
Type of
Measure
Type of
Review
Measure
Documentation and Scoring Guidance
1.1.1 B: Assure a surveillance system is in place for
receiving reports 24/7 and for identifying health
problems, threats, and hazards
Documentation should address:

Processes and protocols to maintain the comprehensive
collection, review, and analysis of data from multiple
sources,

Processes and protocols to assure data are maintained in a
secure and confidential manner

Current 24/7contact information, in the form of a designated
telephone line or a designated contact person (which may be
provided in rural areas via regional or state agreements)

Reports of testing 24/7 contact systems, such as, internet, fax,
page phone line, etc.
Capacity
Health
Department
Level
1.1.2 B: Communicate with surveillance sites on at
least an annual basis.
Documentation should address:

List of providers and public health partners who may be
surveillance sites
Process
Health
Department
Level
Reviewing the Standards
As you review the standards…
• Consider the following questions:
– Will this standard improve public health
department performance?
– Are the important components of this
standard captured in its associated measures
for the standard?
– Can this standard be documented?
– Can health departments meet this standard
now?
Standards for Discussion
• Which standards do you think are particularly
strong?
– You would recommend that PHAB keep these
standards.
• Which standards do you think are
Problematic?
– You think PHAB should modify or possibly
delete these standards.
Your Feedback on the Standards
• Why did this standard catch your attention?
• If you think the standard is strong, why did
you like it?
• If you think the standard is problematic,
why? How would you modify it?
Opportunities to Provide Feedback
There are multiple ways to offer feedback on the standards
and measures before April 30, 2009:
• Complete the online survey at www.phaboard.org
• Complete and submit the online or hard copy vetting forms
• Invite PHAB to lead a standards vetting discussion at your
group meeting
• Lead a vetting session with your group
More Vetting Details
• If you would like a PHAB representative to facilitate
a standards vetting conversation during a group
meeting before April 30, contact Jeff Neistadt at
[email protected] or (419) 353-7714.
• To request discussion guide materials to lead your
own meeting, contact PHAB at
[email protected], and specify the number of
participants you expect to participate.
Next Steps for PHAB
• Results from the focus groups and surveys
will be compiled by an independent research
team and presented to PHAB
• Standards and measures will be revised
based on feedback in advance of the beta
test
For more information…..
www.phaboard.org
[email protected]