Did Health Improvement Programmes improve in their first two years?

Abstract

Objective This study sought to track the development of Health Improvement Programmes (HImPs) from 1999 to 2000. Design A documentary analysis of pairs of HImPs produced by 26 health authorities in 1999 and 2000. Method A structured analytic tool was devised, based on government guidance on the content of HImPs. Results HImPs have become longer, and include more priorities. Health promotion and public health priorities are less commonly chosen than those with a disease focus, particularly those in 'Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation'. There has been a decrease in the quantity of supporting data provided (health needs assessment, financial resources, existing services), and the role of Primary Care Groups and Trusts (PCG/Ts) is not given central emphasis. There is an increase in target-setting and in clarification about roles and responsibilities among partners, and commitment to the principle of public consultation about the local National Health Service (NHS). Conclusion Although the scope of HImPs has broadened, and some components are now presented in more detail, it is not clear that these documents embody more achievable strategies. With so many priorities requiring attention, it seems likely that politically important issues (such as waiting lists) will take precedence over the promotion of population health.