230 likes | 243 Views
This article outlines a proposed model for a voluntary national accreditation program for state and local public health departments. It discusses the process, major elements, and feasibility of the program.
E N D
A Proposed Model for a VOLUNTARY NATIONAL ACCREDITATION PROGRAM for State and Local Public Health Departments Exploring Accreditation Steering Committee Members: Georges Benjamin – APHA Janet Olszewski – ASTHO Bobby Pestronk – NACCHO Harvey Wallace – NALBOH Les Beitsch – Public Health Foundation July 19-20 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Today’s Objectives • Briefly describe the process that led to this proposed model • Outline the major elements of the proposed model • Obtain feedback from you on the proposed model and its feasibility
Project Goal Design a model voluntary national accreditation program for state and local (governmental) public health departments and determine whether it is feasible and desirable to implement
A Rising Tide… • CDC’s Futures Initiative • “Future of the Public’s Health in the 21st Century” (IOM) • RWJF Key Stakeholder Meeting 2004 • Statewide Accreditation Programs • Multi-state Learning Collaborative
PLANNING COMMITTEE Georges Benjamin, APHA Marie Fallon, NALBOH Paul Jarris, ASTHO Pat Libbey, NACCHO STEERING COMMITTEE Chair: Kaye Bender RESEARCH & EVALUATION WORKGROUP Chair: Les Beitsch STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT WORKGROUP Chair: Stephanie Bailey FINANCE & INCENTIVES WORKGROUP Chair: Bruce Pomer GOVERNANCE & IMPLEMENTATION WORKGROUP Chair: Rachel Stevens Key Players
A Proposed Model for a Voluntary National Accreditation Program for State and Local Health Departments
How would the program run?
Accrediting Entity New non-profit organization - Manage the accreditation process - Evaluate effectiveness and impact - Provide orientation to the accreditation process - Advocate for technical assistance - Relate to existing state programs
“A voluntary national accreditation program “should reinforce rather than replace efforts that establish performance standards for [health departments], promote rather than pre-empt widespread use of tools like NPHPSP and MAPP for self-assessment and improvement, and ultimately unify rather than unlink organizational performance and human resource management activities within public health [departments].” Bernard J. Turnock Journal of Public Health Management and Practice May-June 2006
Governing Body 18 members selected for expertise and to represent key stakeholders • Establishes accreditation standards • Determines if departments meet standards • Manages vendors
Eligible Accreditation Applicants Governmental state or local entities with legal responsibility for public health
Standards Development Promote pursuit of excellence, improve performance, and strengthen accountability • Consider existing and developing performance improvement work • Create specific standards around 11 domains based on essential services
Who pays for the program’s operation?
Financing • Controlling Costs • Phased development • Efficient process design • Prudent use of resources • Providing benchmarks to applicants • Building volunteer support • Start-Up • Grant-makers • Government agencies • Health department associations • Operations • Applicant fees • Other sources
Incentives • Orientation of the applicant staff to the process • Readiness review and self-assessment tools • Sources for consultation on ways to meet and exceed standards • Recognition of their accomplishments • Access to funding support for quality and performance improvement and infrastructure needs identified in the accreditation process • Opportunities to pilot new programs and processes based on proven performance levels • Streamlined application processes for grants and programs
Program Evaluation • Is the accrediting entity operating effectively? • Is the accreditation process reasonable? • Is the orientation for applicant staff effective? • Who is participating and are they satisfied? • Are standards and measures reliable and valid? • What performance improvements have resulted? • Is the program perceived as credible by applicants and decision-makers?
Research • Critical for building an evidence base about the value of accreditation • Does accreditation result in improved agency performance? • Does agency performance influence health outcomes?
Public Comment • Comment period ends Wednesday, July 26, 2006 • Go towww.exploringaccreditation.org • Key questions for discussion and feedback
Next Steps • Business Case • Steering Committee Meeting • Final recommendations released at the end of August
Implementation • Strategic business plan • Standards and measures • Pilot projects
For More Information… www.exploringaccreditation.org Jennifer Jimenez Priscilla Barnes ASTHO NACCHO (202) 371-9090 (202) 783-5550 x258