Tag Archives: Performance Measurement

Measuring the Impact of Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health

To better understand the impact of cross-jurisdictional sharing (CJS) among public health agencies, CJS teams need to identify suitable measures and measurement processes. This document provides instructions to develop and implement an impact measurement plan. The document contains only efficiency and effectiveness impact measures and measurement processes that have been developed and are supported by the Center for Sharing Public Health Services and are applicable to select public health program, service and function areas.

Available online: http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Measuring-Impact-CJS.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: The document provides guidance on measuring and demonstrating the impact of a CJS arrangement, by identifying and recording “baseline” and “follow-up” measures.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Cross-Jurisdictional Public Health Sharing Arrangements in Kansas

Public health funding in Kansas and the nation has decreased in recent years, while the responsibilities of public health agencies have not. As resources become more limited, public health departments must explore alternate ways to effectively and efficiently provide foundational public health services to their communities. Some counties in Kansas are responding to this challenge by pooling public health resources with other counties. By sharing services, functions and programs with other jurisdictions, public health departments and policymakers can create economies of scale that allow for a larger impact on the health and well-being of their communities.

Available online: http://www.khi.org/policy/article/kansas_cjs

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Background / History: The Kansas Health Institute (KHI) recently looked inside the development, progression and future of several public health CJS arrangements in Kansas and documented the findings in four case studies.
  • Governance: Gaining and keeping political support from county commissioners is important in CJS arrangements.
  • Rural / Small Jurisdictions: All of the arrangements are located in rural settings. Three of the four collaborations each serve combined populations of around 35,000−40,000.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Why? / Phase One: Because these areas had limited resources to fund public health activities, leaders considered pooling resources and populations with other counties in order to build economies of scale or meet minimum program requirements.
  • Fiscal and Service Implications / Phase Two: The cost to administer programs can be reduced since it saves time on administration when one entity can coordinate services to the residents of multiple counties.
  • Governance / Phase Two: Gaining and keeping political support from county commissioners is important in CJS arrangements.
  • Communications / Phase Two: Constant communication between counties in a collaborative arrangement can be difficult and requires additional effort to ensure that critical items are clearly communicated to all staff.
  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: Conducting regular evaluations of the CJS arrangements could reveal opportunities for these arrangements to increase their efficiency and effectiveness in the community and show value for more widespread adoption.
  • Monitoring and Improving / Phase Three: Throughout the years, the partnerships have gone through several transformations. Some CJS arrangements lost partner counties due to financial and political pressures. Many CJS arrangements made shifts in personnel and operations in order to accommodate new shared services.

 

PNM Family Home Visiting (FHV) Shared Services Feedback Form

The purpose of this form is to obtain your feedback about the past year of Family Home Visiting Shared Services to be provided to staff participating in the arrangement. It could be modified for staff participating in other shared service arrangements.

Available online: http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/MSW_PNM_FHV_evaluation.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Change Management: This form provides a way to explore staff views of a shared services arrangement.
  • Research and Evaluation: This form provides a way to evaluate staff perceptions of a shared services arrangement.li>

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Template Action Plan

This action plan template adapted from the community toolbox lists the steps required to achieve an outcome along with who should complete the action, when it should be completed, what potential barriers may be encountered, and who should be informed about the action.

Available online: http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/action-plan-template.docx

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Change Management: The action plan template will assist participants in understand who is responsible for each task, when the task is due, how to overcome potential obstacles, and communicate results.
  • Communications: The action plan template asks participants to consider how communication will be addressed for the implementation of outlined objectives.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Who? / Phase One: The plan explores who will be responsible for specific tasks were a project to occur.
  • Logistical Issues / Phase Two: The action plan helps participants decide who is responsible for each task, when the task will be completed by, what resources will be needed, what resources are available, what barriers might occur, and how each action will be communicated.
  • Communications / Phase Two: The action plan template asks participants to consider how communication will be addressed for the implementation of outlined objectives.
  • Change Management / Phase Two: The action plan template will assist participants in understand who is responsible for each task, when the task is due, how to overcome potential obstacles, and communicate results.
  • Timeline / Phase Two: Because the action plan requires due dates it is a natural first step to the creation of a timeline.
  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: Are tasks being met, are they being completed on time, are the resources anticipated for the project truthfully available, were all the barriers considered. This template provides a good foundation for exploring how the plan’s implementation is going.

 

Sawyer County Public Health Annual Report 2013

The Sawyer County Health Department Annual Report discusses the status of the Sawyer County Health Department, its successes in providing the ten essential services of public health and the status of its different programs (e.g., Maternal/Child Health).

Available online (pdf): http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/WI_SawyerHDAnnualReport.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Accreditation / Essential Services: The report discusses the delivery of the essential services by the Sawyer County Health Department.
  • Monitoring and Improving: The report provides information regarding the current status of services and their outcomes through the Sawyer County Health Department, which can be used for later comparison.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: The report provides information regarding the current status of services and their outcomes through the Sawyer County Health Department, which can be used for later comparison.
  • Monitoring and Improving / Phase Three: The report provides information regarding the current status of services and their outcomes through the Sawyer County Health Department, which can be used for later comparison.

 

Emergency Preparedness North Member Survey

The document is a survey to assess how well partners in the Emergency Preparedness North collaboration think that the collaboration is doing.

Available online (pdf): http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/WI_Emergenc_Preparedness_Survey.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: The document collects feedback from partners in the collaboration to assess how Emergency Preparedness North is doing.
  • Preparedness / Emergency Response: The survey focuses on an emergency preparedness collaboration.
  • Quality Improvement: The survey could identify areas for quality improvement, particularly in terms of participant satisfaction, agreement, and awareness.
  • Research and Evaluation: The survey evaluates participant satisfaction, agreement, and awareness.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Northern Michigan Public Health Alliance 2015-2017 Strategic Plan At-A-Glance

The document provides an overview of the Northern Michigan Public Health Alliance’s strategic plan, including what the partnership hopes to accomplish in three years, what they believe is blocking them, what partners can do to overcome obstacles, and what the partnership will accomplish (outcomes) in the first year.

Available online (pdf): http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/NMPHA_SP.doc

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Accreditation / Essential Services: This document provides a quick overview of the partnership’s strategic plan, including addressing elements required for accreditation, such as a Community Health Needs Assessment.
  • Change Management: The document identifies barriers to forming the alliance and how those barriers will be addressed.
  • Communications: The document provides a tool to share with external partners regarding what the partnership is doing, how they are doing it, and, to a limited extent, why they are doing it (e.g., to overcome a specific barrier).
  • Monitoring and Improving: By providing specific outcomes, the document provides a way to measure the partnership’s progress.
  • Quality Improvement: The plan identifies goals, barriers, how to address the barriers, and anticipated outcomes for the first year of the partnership.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Public Health Partnership Feedback Survey

This survey instrument is focused on gathering input regarding the organization, approach, and progress made toward goals of the collaborative work being undertaken. It can be administered to key stakeholders within each jurisdiction involved in a shared services arrangement to monitor progress and improvement.

Available online (pdf): http://www.phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CJS_Collaboration_Survey-General.docx

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: This survey instrument can be administered to key stakeholders within each jurisdiction involved in a shared services arrangement in order to monitor progress and improvement.
  • Quality Improvement: This survey instrument can be administered to key stakeholders within each jurisdiction involved in a shared services arrangement in order to monitor progress and improvement.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: This survey instrument can be administered to key stakeholders within each jurisdiction involved in a shared services arrangement in order to monitor progress and improvement.
  • Monitoring and Improving / Phase Three: This survey instrument can be administered to key stakeholders within each jurisdiction involved in a shared services arrangement in order to monitor progress and improvement.

 

Horizon Implementation Work Plan 2014

This implementation work plan developed by the Horizon (MN) restructuring committee outlines next step issues for ongoing discussion, their priority levels, who is responsible, target dates, and status notes for moving forward with consolidating three local public health departments that cover five counties. This document can be used as a template and example for jurisdictions implementing CJS initiatives.

Available online (pdf): http://www.phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/HorizonG-ImplementationWorkPlan.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Change Management: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus by the restructuring committee on change management activities to foster communication and involve all public health staff, commissioners from the five counties, public health community partners and the general public.
  • Communications: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus on the importance of communication and information sharing across all stakeholders, especially public health staff.
  • Consolidation: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the process undertaken by three public health departments covering five counties as they move toward consolidation.
  • Fiscal and Service Issues: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials address financial considerations as well as integration of services and human resources.
  • Governance: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a focus by the restructuring committee on governance related to the joint powers agreement, Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust regarding liability coverage, and board representation, etc.
  • Monitoring and Improving: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the monitoring process and attention to improved communication undertaken by the restructuring committee as consolidation was considered for three public health departments covering five counties.
  • Surveillance / Data Sharing: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include attention on integrating their data sharing capacity.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Context and History / Phase One: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the process undertaken by three public health departments covering five counties as they move toward consolidation.
  • Fiscal and Service Implications / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials address financial considerations as well as integration of services and human resources.
  • Governance / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a focus by the restructuring committee on governance related to the joint powers agreement, Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust regarding liability coverage, and board representation, etc.
  • Legal Issues/ Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the legal issues they addressed during consolidation discussions, i.e., joint powers authority, per capita tax levies, labor/union issues, liability, etc.
  • Logistical Issues / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the personnel/staffing, governance, core services, budget/finance, physical infrastructure, and change management issues they addressed during consolidation discussions.
  • Communications / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus on the importance of communication and information sharing across all stakeholders, especially public health staff.
  • Change Management / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus by the restructuring committee on change management activities to foster communication and involve all the public health staff, commissioners from five counties, public health community partners and the general public.
  • Timeline / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide a detailed timeline undertaken by the restructuring committee as consolidation was considered by the three health departments.
  • Performance Measurementg / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the monitoring process and attention to improved communication undertaken by the restructuring committee as consolidation was considered.

 

Horizon Community Health Board Staff Restructuring Updates

This series of monthly updates was generated by the Horizon (MN) restructuring committee to enhance communication among public health staff about progress to consolidate three public health departments covering five counties.

Available online (pdf): http://phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/HorizonStaffUpdatesNOV.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Background / History: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the process to consolidate three public health departments covering five counties.
  • Change Management: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus by the restructuring committee on change management activities to foster communication and involve all public health staff, commissioners from the five counties, public health community partners and the general public.
  • Communications: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus on the importance of communication and information sharing among all stakeholders, especially public health staff.

This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Context and History / Phase One: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the process to consolidate three public health departments covering five counties.
  • Logistical Issues / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the personnel/staffing, governance, core services, budget/finance, physical infrastructure, and change management issues addressed during consolidation discussions.
  • Communications / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus on the importance of communication and information sharing among all stakeholders, especially public health staff.
  • Change Management / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials include a major focus by the restructuring committee on change management activities to foster communication and involve all public health staff, commissioners from the five counties, public health community partners and the general public.
  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: The Horizon (MN) restructuring materials provide an overview of the monitoring process undertaken by the restructuring committee.

Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs: A Self-Study Guide

This document is a “how to” guide for planning and implementing evaluation activities and is intended to assist state, local, and community managers and staff of public health programs in planning, designing, implementing, and using the results of comprehensive evaluations in a practical way. The strategy presented in this manual will help assure that evaluations meet the diverse needs of internal and external stakeholders, including assessing and documenting program implementation, outcomes, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of activities, and taking action based on evaluation results to increase the impact of programs.

Available online (pdf): http://www.cdc.gov/EVAL/guide/CDCEvalManual.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: This manual will help assure that actions taken are based on evaluation results to increase the impact of programs.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Office of the Director, Office of Strategy and Innovation. (2011). Introduction to program evaluation for public health programs: A self-study guide. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Policy Brief–Consolidation of Local Health Departments in Ohio: Motivations and Impacts

This report examines the motivations for and impacts of consolidations of local public health departments in Ohio. Since 2001, there have been twenty cases of city health departments merging their public health services with those of a county health department or another city health department in Ohio, and this has resulted in a 13 percent decrease in the number of local health departments. Issues involving expenditures, workforces and service delivery are examined.

Available online (pdf): http://www2.kent.edu/cpph/upload/finalraphi-lhdconsolidationsummer2013.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Consolidation: This report examines the impact of consolidation on health departments in Ohio.
  • Fiscal and Service Issues: This report examines the impact of consolidation on services and spending.
  • Quality Improvement: This study reports improved services as a result of consolidation
  • Research and Evaluation: It presents research findings from combined administrative data and from interviews with local health directors

 

This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Morris, M., Stefanak, M., Filla, J. & Hoornbeek, J. (2013). Local Health Department Consolidation in Ohio: Motivations and Impacts. Kent, OH: Center for Public Policy and Health, Kent State University (in cooperation with the Fay Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences).

Final Recommendations for Consolidators

Based on an assessment of three local health departments, Kent State University personnel make recommendations for public health leaders who are consolidating local health agencies. Recommendations include 1) defining and collecting baseline information, 2) carefully planning the process of implementation, and 3) addressing challenges (i.e., leadership, credibility, assessment of progress).

Call the Center for Sharing Public Health Services to obtain this document.

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Accreditation / Essential Services: The document discusses the importance of addressing essential services during a consolidation.
  • Change Management: The document provides suggestions for change management.
  • Consolidation: The document describes the consolidation of three public health agencies.
  • Governance: The document describes the resolution to governance issues across three local public health agencies.
  • Monitoring and Improving: The document discusses the importance of monitoring and collecting data during a consolidation process.
  • Quality Improvement: The document discusses quality improvement processes and provides recommendations for implementation.
  • Research and Evaluation: The document presents findings from a qualitative research process.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 
Kent State University. (2012). Final Recommendations for Consolidators. Kent, OH: Kent State University College of Public Health and Summit County Public Health.

Epilogue: The Consolidating of the Health Departments in Summit County, Ohio

This briefing report is a retrospective review of the process, challenges and outcomes of the consolidation of three health departments.

Available online (pdf): http://www.phsharing.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Summit-County-Epilogue-1-23-13.pdf

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Harvard Kennedy School. (2012). Epilogue: The Consolidation of the Health Departments in Summit County, Ohio. Boston, MA: Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.

Consolidating Health Departments in Summit County, Ohio: A One Year Retrospective

This report provides an overview of the eight major strategic and operational challenges the newly formed Summit County Public Health Department faced as it worked through its first year of transition after consolidating three local public health districts into a unified public health organization. The challenges involved implementing new overall strategic decisions, adjusting personnel and facilities, converting technological systems, managing changing organizational cultures, and communicating with key stakeholders and staff. The report details how these challenges were addressed, progress to date, and overall outcomes and accomplishments.

Available online (pdf): http://www.odh.ohio.gov/~/media/ODH/ASSETS/Files/lhd/Final%20SCPH%20Report.ashx

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Accreditation / Essential Services: The report mentions that the department has applied for accreditation by PHAB, one of the early departments in the country to do so. It assesses the consolidation’s impact on public health programmatic capacities and expertise and on provision of public health services.
  • Background / History: The article describes the reasons for and steps leading to the consolidation of three public health districts in Ohio to form the Summit County Public Health Department.
  • Change Management: The report addresses the need to adjust employee roles, locations and salaries; integrate and convert technologies; and relocate facilities.
  • Communications: The report details efforts to improve the operational challenge most commonly mentioned to researchers, which is communications and engagement with staff.
  • Consolidation: The report discusses perceptions of goals of the consolidation and the pace of progress.
  • Fiscal and Service Issues: The report summarizes results of a report of cost savings achieved after consolidation and changes in external grant funding during the same period.
  • Governance: The report provides a chart and description of the duties of the new organizational structure put in place after the consolidation and details development of a new strategic plan and work to build credibility and engage key external stakeholders.
  • Monitoring and Improving: The report was prepared at the request of the Summit County Public Health Department to assess its first year post-consolidation.
  • Research and Evaluation: The report provides details of the researchers’ collection of data by reviewing key documents, interviewing managers and stakeholders, surveying members of the boards of health for the consolidating units, and conducting focus groups and a survey of staff members.

 

This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Context and History / Phase One: The article describes the reasons for and steps leading to the consolidation of three public health districts in Ohio to form the Summit County Public Health Department.
  • Fiscal and Service Implications / Phase Two: It summarizes results of a report of cost savings achieved after consolidation and changes in external grant funding during the same period.
  • Governance / Phase Two: The report provides a chart and description of the duties of the new organizational structure put in place after the consolidation and details development of a new strategic plan and work to build credibility and engage key external stakeholders.
  • Logistical Issues / Phase Two: The report details how challenges were addressed, progress to date, and overall outcomes and accomplishments.
  • Communications / Phase Two: The report details efforts to improve the operational challenge most commonly mentioned to researchers, which is communications and engagement with staff.
  • Change Management / Phase Two: It addresses the need to adjust employee roles, locations and salaries; integrate and convert technologies; and relocate facilities.
  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: This report was prepared at the request of the Summit County Public Health Department to assess its first year post-consolidation.
  • Implementation and Management / Phase Three: The report addresses how challenges were met involving implementing new overall strategic decisions, adjusting personnel and facilities, converting technological systems, managing changing organizational cultures, and communicating with key stakeholders and staff.
  • Communications and Change Management / Phase Three: It addresses the need to adjust employee roles, locations and salaries; integrate and convert technologies; and relocate facilities.
  • Monitoring and Improving / Phase Three: This report was prepared at the request of the Summit County Public Health Department to assess its first year post-consolidation.

 

Hoornbeek, J., Budnik, A., Beechey, T., & Filla, J. (2012). Consolidating Health Departments in Summit County, Ohio: A One Year Retrospective. Kent, OH: Kent State University, College of Public Health, Center for Public Administration and Public Policy.

Multistate Assessment of Public Health Surveillance Relevant to American Indians and Alaska Natives, 2007

This article focuses on the need to strengthen relationships among the multiple jurisdictions involved in the health of American Indians and Alaska Native populations. It reports the results of an online survey of state epidemiologists assessing collaboration between state health departments and AI/AN Tribes and agencies. The report’s findings align with previous work indicating that Tribal, federal, and state stakeholders believe that surveillance of AI/AN population health is both critical and currently suboptimal.

Available online: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/jhdrp/vol5/iss1/9/

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: Strengthening the functional relationships between state health departments and American Indians and Alaska Natives will facilitate surveillance and response capacity to address continuing and emerging public health problems.
  • Research and Evaluation: This study assessed collaboration between state health departments and AI/AN Tribes and agencies through an online survey of state epidemiologists.
  • Surveillance / Data Sharing: The survey completes an effort to describe public health surveillance of AI/AN populations from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.
  • Tribal Issues: This report is the first to quantify the extent of state collaboration with AI/AN tribes and organizations on public health surveillance.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

  • Performance Measurement / Phase Two: Continual strengthening of the functional relationships between state health departments and American Indians and Alaska Natives will facilitate surveillance and response capacity to address continuing and emerging public health problems.
  • Monitoring and Improving / Phase Three: Strengthening the functional relationships between state health departments and American Indians and Alaska Natives will facilitate surveillance and response capacity to address continuing and emerging public health problems.

 

Bertolli, J., Chao, E., Landen, M., Wells, E., Hayes, J., Mahal, Z., et. al. (2012). Multistate Assessment of Public Health Surveillance Relevant to American Indians and Alaska Natives. Journal of Health Disparities Research and Practice 5(1), 99–109.

Building Capacity to Support and Study QI in Local Georgia Public Health Systems

The article focuses on a study of quality improvement (QI) in Georgia’s local public health systems and provides insight into the use of regional bodies as QI collaboratives and multijurisdictional entities.

Available online: http://uknowledge.uky.edu/frontiersinphssr/vol1/iss3/6/

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Quality Improvement: It reports on development of a study of quality improvement on selected projects in three Georgia Health Districts.
  • Research and Evaluation: It describes a process by which health districts collaborated with the coordinating center to study selected QI projects and develop models for improvement.

 

This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Livingood, W. C., Marshall, N., Peden, A. Gonzales, K., Shah, G. H., Toal, R., et. al. (2012). Building capacity to support and study QI in local Georgia public health systems. Frontiers in Public Health Services and Systems Research 1(3).

Information-Seeking Behaviors and Other Factors Contributing to Successful Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices in Local Health Departments

This article describes factors that contribute to successful implementation of public health science. Health departments that are successful in implementing evidence-based practices have strong relationships and good communication channels established with their academic partner(s). Implementation of evidence-based programs was most often related to high priority community needs and the availability of resources to address these needs.

Available online: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23023282

It is included in the CJS Resource Library under the categories listed below. Select a link to find other resources in that category.

  • Monitoring and Improving: Article points out that implementation of evidence-based programs was related to addressing high priority community needs.

 
This resource is also linked to the Roadmap. Select a link below to read more about each area.

 

Cilenti, D., Brownson, R. C., Umble, K., Erwin, P. C., & Summers, R. (2012). Information-seeking behaviors and other factors contributing to successful implementation of evidence-based practices in local health departments. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 18(6), 571–576.