1 / 23

Proposed Model for Voluntary National Accreditation Program for Public Health Departments

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.

essieh
Télécharger la présentation

Proposed Model for Voluntary National Accreditation Program for Public Health Departments

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. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. A Proposed Model for a Voluntary National Accreditation Program for State and Local Health Departments

  7. Why accreditation now?

  8. What is the value of the program?

  9. How would the program run?

  10. 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

  11. “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

  12. Governing Body 18 members selected for expertise and to represent key stakeholders • Establishes accreditation standards • Determines if departments meet standards • Manages vendors

  13. Eligible Accreditation Applicants Governmental state or local entities with legal responsibility for public health

  14. 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

  15. Who pays for the program’s operation?

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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?

  19. 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?

  20. Public Comment • Comment period ends Wednesday, July 26, 2006 • Go towww.exploringaccreditation.org • Key questions for discussion and feedback

  21. Next Steps • Business Case • Steering Committee Meeting • Final recommendations released at the end of August

  22. Implementation • Strategic business plan • Standards and measures • Pilot projects

  23. For More Information… www.exploringaccreditation.org Jennifer Jimenez Priscilla Barnes ASTHO NACCHO (202) 371-9090 (202) 783-5550 x258

More Related