Back to Annual Meeting
Back to Annual Meeting
APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing
Kathleen M. Roe, DrPH, MPH1, Gayle Burns2, Tracey Packer, MPH2, Perry Rhodes, lll2, Frank Strona, MPH3, Edward Byrom4, and Kevin T. Roe, MPH5. (1) Health Science Department, San Jose State University, One Washington Square MH 407, SJSU, San Jose, CA 95192--0052, 408-924-2976, firstname.lastname@example.org, (2) HIV Prevention Services, SF Department of Public Health, 25 Van Ness, San Francisco, CA 95112, (3) Ccc, 584 Castro Street #584, San Francisco, CA 94114, (4) Black Coalition on AIDS, 25 Van Ness, San Francisco, CA 94109, (5) Community Health Studies Group, 231 Sanchez Street, #5, San Francisco, CA 94114
Issues: Over the past ten years, HIV community planning has significantly changed prevention and health services in communities across the United States. Recently, many jurisdictions have responded to changing policy, political, or economic pressures by combining their prevention and health services groups in an effort to maximize resources, increase local political influence, or streamline the cumbersome community planning process. Others have resisted the pressure to merge.
Description: This case study presents results of the evaluation of a large and influential jurisdiction which has consciously resisted merging prevention and care. Instead, the two planning groups have engaged a careful and deliberative process of seeking “points of integration” – those places in which prevention and care together create new insights, better leverage, and more effective strategies and interventions.
Lessons learned: Finding points of integration must begin with identifying core principles from prevention and services planning; cultures of even very similar planning bodies can be markedly different; gains and losses of merging prevention and care can have significant impact on the place, position, and effectiveness of local approaches to HIV/AIDS and indirect, even unanticipated influence on broader public health issues in the local jurisdiction and beyond.
Recommendations: A cautious, intentional, inclusive process is necessary to deciding whether or not to integrate community planning for HIV prevention and health services. Common principles and points of integration provide a critical foundation for effective action that retains the edge of each while enhancing the community's vision and capacity for addressing HIV/AIDS in the 21st century.
Keywords: HIV/AIDS, Community Planning
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Any relevant financial relationships? No
Any institutionally-contracted trials related to this submission?
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.