Upload
gordon-lane
View
219
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Proposed Model for a VOLUNTARY NATIONAL
ACCREDITATION PROGRAM for State and Local Public Health
Departments
Exploring Accreditation Steering Committee Members:
Georges Benjamin – APHAJanet Olszewski – ASTHO
Bobby Pestronk – NACCHOHarvey Wallace – NALBOH
Les Beitsch – Public Health Foundation
July 19-20Centers 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
Key Players
STANDARDS DEVELOPMENTWORKGROUP
Chair: Stephanie Bailey
STEERING COMMITTEEChair: Kaye Bender
RESEARCH & EVALUATIONWORKGROUP
Chair: Les Beitsch
FINANCE & INCENTIVES
WORKGROUPChair: Bruce Pomer
GOVERNANCE & IMPLEMENTATION
WORKGROUPChair: Rachel Stevens
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Georges Benjamin, APHA Marie Fallon, NALBOH Paul Jarris, ASTHO Pat Libbey, NACCHO
A Proposed Model for a Voluntary National Accreditation Program for State and Local Health Departments
Why accreditation now?
What is the value of the program?
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. TurnockJournal of Public Health Management and PracticeMay-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
• Start-Up– Grant-makers
– Government agencies
– Health department associations
• Operations– Applicant fees
– Other sources
• Controlling Costs– Phased development
– Efficient process design
– Prudent use of resources
– Providing benchmarks to applicants
– Building volunteer support
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 to www.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