Process in Action: Examples from the Field
Below are examples of approaches that the nation
and states used to identify and involve partners in the Healthy People planning process.
From the National Initiative
Healthy People Consortium
Established in 1987, the Healthy People
Consortium is composed of more than 350 national membership organizations and the state
public health, mental health, substance abuse, and environmental health agencies. The
Consortium includes organizations that are national in scope and whose members
(individuals, institutions, or affiliates) are interested in improving health and well-being for all. Consortium member organizations represent older adults, racial and ethnic
coalitions, educators, businesses, providers, scientists, and many others.
The Consortium uses the Internet, quarterly
newsletters, and annual meetings to support ongoing communication and collaboration. In
the initial stages of the Healthy People 2010 development process, Consortium members were
asked to renew their commitment to Healthy People and to the development of year 2010
objectives. See a copy of the pledge. Visit the Consortium web
site for how to
join, as well as the most current listing of members, newsletters, and summaries of annual
meetings: http://odphp.osophs.dhhs.gov/pubs/hp2000/consort.htm.
Activities
Consortium members engage in a broad range of
activities that support achievement of the national health objectives. Nearly all members
have publicized the objectives to their members; and many have used their newsletters and
journals to solicit comments on the draft Healthy People 2000 and 2010 objectives. Many
others have highlighted the objectives at their annual conferences or devoted sessions to
discuss how the organization and individuals can help achieve the objectives.
Focus Groups
In 1996, the Consortium used professionally
facilitated focus group sessions with key partners to examine the perceived value and
functions of Healthy People objectives, both current and future. The findings from the
Consortium focus groups can be found in Chapter Two of the report, Stakeholders Revisit
Healthy People 2000 to Maximize the Impact of 2010, at the following web site:
http://www.health.gov/hpcomments/stakeholder.
Clear themes and suggestions emerged from the
analysis of the focus groups. Consortium members were unanimous in valuing Healthy
People 2000 as a "voice for public health." The value of the document
was not debated, only the extent and nature of revisions to be made for the next version.
Although most Consortium members did not want major changes in the structure and content
of the document, they did want to take advantage of new information and communication
technology to create not only a single "reference" document, but also a flexible
"database" that would permit multiple versions of the document to be produced.
Healthy People State Action Contacts
The Healthy People State Action Contacts are the
states' representatives to the Healthy People Consortium. They receive national Healthy
People resources and communicate to the nation information about state activities. An
updated list is available in Appendix A and at the following web site: http://www.healthypeople.gov/HPScripts/StateContact.asp.
Business Advisory Council
In 1997, with funding from the Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation, the Partnership for Prevention (a Healthy People Consortium member)
created a Healthy People Business Advisory Council. This Council is engaging the leaders
of America’s businesses, both large and small, in evaluating Healthy People as a tool
for both worksite based and general community health promotion. The Council also
participated in Healthy People 2010 development. For information on Council activities,
visit: http://www.prevent.org
From State Initiatives 
Form a statewide coalition of partners
In 1991 South Carolina formed the Healthy
People Coalition as an independent organization with members elected to a governing
council. The Coalition's mission is to promote an environment where all South Carolinians
have the ability to achieve and maintain maximum health and well-being. The
Coalition’s strategies included raising public awareness of the national health
objectives, identifying the focus for action in communities throughout the state, and
focusing attention on reducing health status disparities among population groups. The
Coalition worked with the Department of Health and Environmental Control and other
organizations to track changes in health status, behaviors, and other indicators against
the national Healthy People objectives and promoted their findings. Local communities also
formed their own coalitions, which meet annually to learn about activities in other
localities.
Formed in 1990, the Healthy West Virginia
Coalition is composed of 18 organizations representing public health, health care
providers, school health programs, universities, worksites, and networks. The Coalition
fosters collaboration among various sectors to help advance the goals of Healthy People
2000 and 2010 in West Virginia. West Virginia also planned a two-day Summit, scheduled for
summer 1999, to bring together hundreds of West Virginians for a meeting on the Healthy
People goals and objectives. Another instrumental group for pulling together key partners
has been the State Health Education Council, founded in 1977, an organization of more than
300 individuals working in the areas of health promotion and health education in the state
of West Virginia.
To achieve its year 2000 objectives, the Rhode
Island Department of Health initiated the Worksite Wellness Council of Rhode Island.
Rhode Island focused on increasing health promotion and disease prevention activities in
worksites, where most adults spend the majority of their time. The state Wellness Council
entered into an agreement with the Wellness Council of America (WELCOA) to make Rhode
Island the first Well State in the U.S. Through this agreement, Rhode Island aims to have
20 percent of its workforce in WELCOA-certified Work Well Sites. The Wellness Council
obtained a nonprofit tax status and is governed by its own Board of Directors. While the
Council works toward financial independence, the Council is staffed by the Department of
Health and supported by financial and in-kind contributions of its business members. The
Council will continue to be involved in Rhode Island's year 2010 activities.
Develop multiple levels of participation
Iowa organized multiple levels of
participation in the development of year 2000 objectives. Iowa’s governor appointed a
19-member Healthy Iowans Task Force, composed of state agencies, academic institutions,
voluntary agencies, consumers, health professional associations, and the state board of
health. Iowa's governor assured gender and political party balanced the group. A
consortium of 80 professional and voluntary organizations assisted in the development of
sections and action steps. The state mailed several hundred copies of the draft Healthy
Iowans 2000 to interested groups and individuals for comment. Written comments, as
well as testimony at public meetings, informed the Task Force’s final deliberations
with the governor over the objectives.
According to the Iowa Department of Health, the
private and voluntary sector has or shares major responsibility for 20 percent of the 338
action steps in Healthy Iowans 2000. The state’s year 2000 plan designated
specific state agencies, voluntary organizations, and companies that would be involved in
the realization of each objective.
In 1995 Vermont adjusted the state’s
health status objectives to the community level. This created a document more meaningful
to local organizations and helped to further engage the people at the community level.
In the spring of 1996, the Texas
Department of Health, the Texas Health Foundation, and the CDC sponsored a two and a
half-day conference entitled "Mobilizing for Health: The ABCs of Community
Assessment." Over 700 persons attended the conference. The conference goal was to
provide communities with the planning, data collection, community organizing, and policy
analysis tools needed to successfully undertake the community assessment process. It
attracted a wide variety of private, public, and nonprofit organizations and encouraged
them to work together to improve the overall health of Texas communities.
Minnesota formed the Minnesota Health
Improvement Partnership, a group of individuals representing a broad sector of both public
and private organizations, including members from local departments of health. This group
was charged with the responsibility to develop Healthy Minnesotans: Public Health
Improvement Goals for 2004.
Influence strategic plans of external community organizations,
both private and public
Maine and Tennessee were among several
states whose year 2000 objectives influenced the planning and activities of private health
organizations. As examples, the American Cancer Society in Maine redesigned their core
activities to reflect the state's health objectives. Tennessee’s Health Facilities
Commission incorporated the state's objectives into its Certificate of Need Process.
Since 1995, Minnesota law has required
managed care organizations to submit Collaboration Plans to the state's Commissioner of
Health. Plans must describe actions that the health maintenance organizations or
community-integrated networks have taken or intend to take to achieve public health goals.
The Minnesota legislation helps communities utilize the combined efforts of the public and
private sectors to address priority health problems of shared concern.
In South Dakota individual programs seek
input from partners within and outside state government. The state’s Public Health
Alliance Program is a cooperative effort involving the Department of Health, local health
care providers, and county government. These entities work together to ensure the delivery
of public health services. Through this project, community councils are formed and
actively participate in program planning and implementation. County-specific health
indicators are presented to community health councils. During these presentations, the
county-specific indicators are compared to statewide indicators, national measures, and
relevant Healthy People objectives.
Methods of Community Input in the
Development of
State-Specific Healthy People 2000 Plans
(N=43)
Note: States may be counted
more than once since some provide more than one type of assistance in objectives planning,
development, and tracking.
Source: Public Health Foundation. Measuring
Health Objectives and Indicators: 1997 State and Local Capacity Survey. March 1998. |
