1 / 16

California Environmental Health Tracking Program Future Assessment Report

California Environmental Health Tracking Program Future Assessment Report. CEHTP Technical Meeting Project Briefing 08/22/03. Agenda. Present Project Status Review Interview Responses Review Draft Selection Criteria Highlight Next Steps. Project Status. Conducted 12 of 21 interviews

adara
Download Presentation

California Environmental Health Tracking Program Future Assessment Report

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. California Environmental Health Tracking Program Future Assessment Report CEHTP Technical Meeting Project Briefing 08/22/03

  2. Agenda • Present Project Status • Review Interview Responses • Review Draft Selection Criteria • Highlight Next Steps

  3. Project Status • Conducted 12 of 21 interviews • Highway Performance Monitoring System, Caltrans, Division of Transportation System Information • Medi-Cal Database, DHS, Medi-Cal Statistics Section • SENSOR Asthma Database, DHS, OHB • SENSOR Pesticide Illness Database, DHS, OHB, Agricultural Health and Safety Section • Elevated Lead Visual Information System, DHS, OHB,Occupational Lead Poisoning Prevention Program • Water Quality Monitoring Database, DHS, Drinking Water Program • Aerometric Data Analysis and Management System, CalEPA, ARB • CA Emission Inventory Development and Reporting System, CalEPA, ARB • Pesticide Use Report Database, CalEPA, DPR • Environmental Protection Indicators for California, CalEPA, OEHHA (added) • Patient Discharge Database, OSHPD • National Emission Inventory Database (NEI), USEPA, Emission Factor and Inventory Group

  4. Project Status • Interviews Pending • California Cancer Registry, DHS Cancer Surveillance Section • Birth Defects Database, DHS, Cancer Surveillance Section • AVSS, EDRS or Fetal Deaths, DHS, Office of Health Information and Research, Vital Statistics Section • California Health Interview Survey, UCLA Center for Health Policy Research • Behavioral Risk Factor Survey, Public Health Institute, Survey Research Group • California Women’s Health Survey, Public Health Institute, Survey Research Group • Toxics Release Inventory, USEPA, Toxics Release Inventory Program • Superfund National Priorities List Assessment Program, USEPA • Response and Surveillance System for Childhood Lead Exposure, DHS, Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch

  5. Interview Objectives For each selected system -- • Understand functionality and technology • Database application, evolution and support • System documentation • System data scope and use • Data collection process • Determine compatibility with EHTN goals • Data collected and period of collection • Age of data repository • Data reliability • Data currency and frequency of update • Data accessibility and confidentiality

  6. Interview Summary

  7. Interview Summary

  8. Interview Summary

  9. Interview Summary

  10. Interview Responses (Themes)

  11. Interview Responses (Themes) The Good • Willing network participants • Quality control processes used • Reliable data • Variety of data sharing methods for multiple uses and users • Planned enhancements (continued use) • Limited use/integration of external data • Systems data are accessible electronically

  12. Interview Responses (Themes) The Bad • Range of official and available historical data • Data currency • Limited IT staff resources • Planned enhancements (moving target) • Varying system documentation detail

  13. Interview Responses (Themes) The Ugly • Confidentiality (regulatory vs. non-regulatory mission) • Range and specificity of geographic identifiers • Incomplete data • Period reported (e.g.,annual, monthly, daily) • Organization specific and unique data standards

  14. Draft Selection Criteria • Geographic/spatial specificity (identify event and person location within 1 kilometer) • System documentation (minimum of data dictionary) • Confidentiality (no exclusion of “critical” data) • Data transfer capability (import via electronic transfer) • Data archives (official data archive >5 years) • Data currency (official data available within 6 months from event date)

  15. Draft Selection Criteria • Period reported (minimum of monthly event reporting) • Complete data (estimated receipts >80% of total events) • Reliability (quality control processes used) • Availability of system support (dedicated resources for quality control and system maintenance) • Organization support for system (planning or other documentation demonstrates system support and continuity) • Willingness to participate • Number of records

  16. Next Steps • Complete interviews – September 5, 2003 • Finalize selection criteria – September 5, 2003 • Draft Phase I Briefing Document – September 12, 2003 • Initiate Phase II planning – September 19, 2003

More Related