177603 An Analysis of results from Version One of the National Public Health Performance Standards Program Program Local Governance Instrument

Wednesday, October 29, 2008: 8:30 AM

Richard Ingram, MEd , College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
Andrew Buell Beckett, MPH , College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
F. Douglas Scutchfield, MD , College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
Liza Corso, MPA , Od/ocphp, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
Marie M. Fallon, MHSA, EdD (c) , National Association of Local Boards of Health, Bowling Green, OH
     
Introduction:This study examines results from the National Public Health Performance Standards Program (NPHPSP) Local Governance Instrument (LGI), and compares the results with demographic data reported by the Local Boards of Health (LBOH)and data on performance compiled by the NPHPSP Local Public Health System Instrument (LSI). It seeks to determine effectiveness of local boards of health (LBOH) in assuring the ten essential public health services (EPHS).

Methods: Scores of LGI were analyzed and also compared to those of 519 LSI that had been completed by local health departments, and were examined regarding LBOH performance in providing the ten EPHS. Mean scores of the LGI were then compared to the mean scores of the LSI to see the assessments reflected each other. Three analyses were performed- of all 173 of the instruments, 24 instruments (excluding N.J.) and 149 N.J. instruments.

The study population is all jurisdictions that completed the LGI, from 2003 through December 2006.

Local Boards of Health perform well on EPHS #6, #2, and #7. Performance is not optimal on EPHS #10 and #9. LGI scores reflected a higher level for EPHS than LSI scores, and differences in performance between LGI and LSI occurred for EPHS 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

Results:LBOH perform well in assuring some EPHS, and poorly in assuring other EPHS. Data suggest that LGI performance follows LSI performance in aggregate. Mean scores for EPHS are parallel for the LGI and the LSI.

Discussion:The small number of LGIs that have been completed limits the utility of the instrument for performance improvement, and the ability to ascertain what variables contribute to the function of LBOH, and how that reflects itself in public health system performance and changes in health status. The LGI may become a key aspect of accreditation efforts, and use should be emphasized.

Learning Objectives:
Analyze the results of Version One of the NPHPSP LGI. Identify salient facts in the analysis that may help inform future use of the LGI. Discuss how the results of the LGI may impact future mnovements toward accreditation.

Keywords: Performance Measurement, Accreditation

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: Although not the primary researcher, I was an integral part of the research that led to the production of the work presented. The primary researcher has assented to my presentation of the work contained herein.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

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.

See more of: Quality Improvement Through Accreditation and Performance Standards
See more of: Health Administration