245613 For the public's health: Two Institute of Medicine reports on the role of measurement and the law as drivers of population health improvement

Monday, October 31, 2011: 2:50 PM

Alina Baciu, PhD, MPH , Keck Center of the National Academies, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC
Marthe Gold, MD, MPH , Sophie Davis School of Bio-Medical Education, City University of New York Medical School, New York, NY
Steven M. Teutsch, MD, MPH , Los Angeles County Public Health, Los Angeles, CA
Amy Geller, MPH , Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC
     
In 2009, the Institute of Medicine convened a new committee on public health at the request of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The committee was charged with preparing a series of reports on three major and interrelated topics pertinent to public health practice and to the work of improving population health: measurement, law and policy, and resources. The committee's work builds on previous work at IOM, including the notion of the multisectoral public health system described in the 2003 report The Future of the Public's Health in the 21st Century, the circumstances surrounding the work of the 2009-2011 committee differed somewhat. Most prominently, the Affordable Care Act of 2010 offered an opportunity for government public health agencies to move beyond the clinical care services so many provide, toward fuller development of their capabilities in areas more congruent with the goal of improving population health. In its first and second reports (released in December 2010 and June 2011, respectively), the committee offers a series of recommendations intended to strengthen the broader context of public health practice. These recommendations address structural and operational challenges and opportunities, from transforming the national system of population health statistics and information to better serve the needs of communities, to the diffuse nature of accountability among the many partners of the multi-sectoral public health system, to the potential role of public health agencies in communicating to the public about the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of clinical care services in their community.

Learning Areas:
Public health or related public policy

Learning Objectives:
1. Describe key arguments the two reports offer for using the evidence base on the social determinants of health as the main driver for transforming how American society views and addresses population health. 2. Identify three recommendations in the committee’s reports that are relevant to local public health practitioners seeking to improve their community’s health. 3. Explain the measurement framework for accountability introduced in the committee’s first report and expanded on in its second report. 4. Discuss how the committee’s report on law addresses the differences between public policies that have health and their primary objective and those that have other primary objectives but pose implications for population, and community, health.

Keywords: Accountability, Health Reform

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I am the study director for this Institute of Medicine project.
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: Balancing Equity, Effectiveness and Efficiency in Health System Reform
See more of: Community Health Planning and Policy Development