Local Health Department Accreditation Research Articles

Supporting Increased Local Health Department Accreditation: Qualitative Insights From Accredited Small Local Health Departments.

Accredited health departments now cover 80% of the US population. A relatively modest proportion of these are small local health departments (LHDs), serving fewer than 50 000 people. Despite comprising more than half of all health departments, only 2% of small LHDs are accredited. This brief report is a qualitative inquiry into the enablers of accreditation for small LHDs. We interviewed health department and accreditation leaders from 9 accredited small local LHDs. Interviews were transcribed, verified, and coded by 2 coders. We found that dedicated funding, prework, clear expectations, and peer examples were strong enablers of accreditation for these groups. Additional resources specific to small LHDs may be necessary to expedite application processes and encourage greater uptake from this group.

Local Health Department Accreditation Is Associated With Organizational Supports for Evidence-Based Decision Making.

Introduction: Recent studies show that health department accreditation from the U.S. Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) drives performance management and quality improvement. PHAB standards call for agencies to use evidence in decision making. It is unknown whether accreditation is associated with organizational supports for evidence-based decision making (EBDM). Self-report data from a 2017 survey of U.S. local health departments were analyzed to test relationships of accreditation status with organizational supports for EBDM.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in this observational study. A total of 579 local health departments were invited to complete an online survey; 350 (60.4%) provided complete data for the present study. The dependent variables were six factors of organizational supports for EBDM previously validated through confirmatory factor analyses. Accreditation status (PHAB-accredited, preparing, not preparing) was the independent variable of interest. Logistic regression analyses controlled for governance (presence of a local board of health; state, local, or shared state and local governance) and jurisdiction population size.Results: PHAB-accredited health departments were more likely to report higher capacity for EBDM, resource availability for EBDM, and evaluation capacity than health departments that reported not yet preparing for accreditation. Health departments that reported preparing for PHAB accreditation showed a non-significant pattern of higher perceived supports for EBDM compared to departments not preparing for accreditation.Conclusion: PHAB standards and the accreditation process may help stimulate health department organizational supports for EBDM.

Impact of Local Boards of Health on Local Health Department Accreditation, Community Health Assessment, Community Health Improvement Planning, and Strategic Planning.

Local health departments (LHDs) are increasingly using national standards to meet the challenges presented by the complex environments in which these agencies operate. Local boards of health (LBoHs) might play an instrumental role in improving LHDs' engagement in activities to meet these standards. To assess the impact of LBoH performance of governance functions on LHDs having a current (completed within 5 years) community health assessment (CHA), community health improvement plan (CHIP), strategic plan, and level of engagement in the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) accreditation program. Binary and multinomial logistic regression models were used to analyze linked data from 329 LHDs participating in both the 2015 Local Board of Health Survey and the 2016 National Profile of LHDs Survey. Higher performance of LBoH governance functions, measured by an overall scale of LBoH taxonomy consisting of 60 items, had a significant positive effect on LHDs having completed CHA (P < .001), CHIP (P = .01), and strategic plan (P < .001). LHDs operating in communities with a higher score on the overall scale of LBoH taxonomy had significantly higher odds (P = .03) of having higher level of participation in the PHAB national voluntary accreditation program-that is, being accredited, having submitted application for accreditation, or being in the e-PHAB system (eg, by submitting a letter of intent). LBoHs serve as governance bodies for roughly 71% of LHDs and can play a significant role in encouraging LHDs' participation in these practices. That positive influence of LBoHs can be seen more clearly if the complexity and richness of LBoH governance functions and other characteristics are measured appropriately. The study findings suggest that LBoHs are a significant component of the public health system in the United States, having positive influence on LHDs having a CHA, CHIP, strategic plan, and participation in accreditation.

Behavioral Health, Local Health Department Accreditation, and Public Health 3.0: Leveraging Opportunities for Collaboration.

The rise of the opioid epidemic and the increasing rate of suicides have drawn attention to mental health and addiction and have highlighted the need for collaboration between public health and behavioral health. However, these 2 fields have had limited engagement with one another. The introduction of Public Health 3.0 and population-based financing models that promote prevention and value in health care have created opportunities and incentives for local health departments and behavioral health agencies and providers to work together. New undertakings include the creation of accountable care organizations, community health needs assessment requirements for all non-profit hospitals, local health department requirements to conduct community Health Assessments (CHA), and increasing numbers of public health departments that are pursing accreditation. We argue that by taking advantage of these opportunities and others, local health departments can play a vital role in addressing critical challenges in mental health and addiction facing their communities.

National Voluntary Public Health Accreditation

This article examines local health department (LHD) participation and intentions to participate in national voluntary accreditation and reasons for not seeking accreditation. Specifically, it compares the results of national surveys among LHDs in 2010, 2013, and 2014. Longitudinal cohort study. United States. LHDs that responded to the 2014 Forces of Change Survey and the 2010 and 2013 National Association of County and City Health Officials Profile studies. LHD level of engagement in Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) accreditation. Data of 2014 indicated that 1% of LHDs achieved accreditation and 11% had submitted an application or a statement of intent, compared with 6% of LHDs that submitted an application or a statement of intent in 2013. The percent of LHDs that indicated they planned to apply for accreditation but had not submitted a statement of intent declined from 27% in 2013 to 22% in 2014. In multivariate models, controlling for governance category and jurisdiction population size, LHDs in states where the state health department (SHD) participated in e-PHAB had higher odds of being favorably inclined toward accreditation than those located in states where the SHD was not in the e-PHAB system (odds ratio = 2.82, 95% confidence interval: 1.81-4.41). Across 2013 and 2014, and across small and large LHDs, the top 2 reasons for deciding not to apply for accreditation were the time/effort required exceeded the benefits (67%) and fees were too high (46%). SHDs are powerful mediators of LHDs' perceptions of the PHAB accreditation program. Health department governance structure and jurisdiction population size are associated with LHD accreditation participation decisions. With the launch of PHAB's program, fewer LHDs are undecided about accreditation participation and many have taken affirmative steps to become accredited. The top 2 reasons LHDs indicated for not proceeding with accreditation were time/effort exceed benefit and fees perceived as too high.

It's Not Just a Yes or No Answer: Expressions of Local Health Department Accreditation.

The identification and exploration of moderators of health department accreditation remain limited by current dichotomous conceptualizations of pursuit. A 2015 survey measured Indiana local health department (LHD) accreditation pursuit and progress, classifying respondents by progress evidence. Covariates included attitudes about the future impact of accreditation on funding and performance, health department size, geography, health outcome ranking, and quality improvement (QI) programing. Four classifications of accreditation pursuit emerged and were found to have greater association with covariates than standard dichotomous measures. "Active Pursuit" was associated with formal QI programing and a belief that accreditation will impact future funding and performance. "Intent Only" was associated with no QI programing and no completion of accreditation prerequisites. "Discontinued" was associated with the belief that accreditation will not impact future performance. "Not Pursuing" was associated with no interest or plan to complete prerequisites and reported belief that accreditation will not impact future health department funding or performance. More granular characterizations of accreditation pursuit may improve understanding of influential factors. This measurement framework should be validated in studies of LHDs in other states.

Patterns and predictors of local health department accreditation in Missouri.

The Healthy People 2020 goal for the public health system is "to ensure that Federal, State, Tribal, and local health agencies have the necessary infrastructure to effectively provide essential public health services." To address this goal, Missouri established the first statewide, voluntary accreditation program of local health departments (LHDs) and began accrediting the LHDs in 2003. The purpose of this study was to identify organizational, structural, and workforce factors related to accreditation status of LHDs in Missouri. Using data from the National Association of County & City Health Officials (2010) and the Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services (2012), binary logistic regression analysis was performed to predict accreditation status of LHDs. Likelihood ratio tests were used to examine whether the addition of each predictor added significantly to the model compared with a model including total revenues alone. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs), 95% confidence intervals, the significance level of the likelihood ratio test, and the overall Nagelkerke pseudo-R for each model are reported. Having a community health improvement plan (aOR = 6.2), a strategic plan (aOR = 7.9), evaluating programs (aOR = 3.6), being in a region with a high proportion of accredited LHDs (aOR = 5.5), and participating in multijurisdictional collaborations (aOR = 6.4) all increased the likelihood of accreditation. Barriers of time (aOR = 0.1) and cost (aOR = 0.3) were negatively associated with accreditation. Accredited LHDs were more likely to have completed the prerequisites for accreditation and collaborate with other LHDs. These activities help LHDs meet the accreditation standards. In addition, with shrinking budgets, LHDs will need additional financial and technical support to achieve accreditation. Assisting LHDs to find ways to increase the staff is important. Through collaborations with other LHDs, regional or multicounty positions can be created. Also collaborations with universities, specifically colleges or schools of public health, can provide opportunities for internships at LHDs giving practical experience while providing important assistance to LHDs.

Informing the National Public Health Accreditation Movement: Lessons From North Carolina's Accredited Local Health Departments

To advance understanding of public health accreditation, we analyzed data on the North Carolina Local Health Department Accreditation program. We surveyed accredited health departments on barriers to and supports of accreditation preparation, performance on accreditation standards, and benefits and improvements after accreditation. All 48 accredited agencies responded to the survey. All agencies improved policies to prepare for accreditation and met most accreditation standards. Forty-six percent received local funds for accreditation preparation. The most common barrier to accreditation preparation was time and schedule limitations (79%). Fifty percent of agencies acted on suggestions for improvement, and 67% conducted quality improvement activities. Benefits of accreditation included improvements in local partnerships. Agencies of all sizes conducted accreditation activities, were successfully accredited, and experienced benefits resulting from accreditation.

The Performance of Local Health Departments

Local health department (LHD) performance measurement provides an opportunity to link inputs, outputs, and outcomes in a manner that should facilitate quality improvement. Since inputs flow from LHDs that vary substantially in size, organization, funding, and other characteristics, it is Reasonable to assume that these variable inputs may affect LHD performance or outcomes. Documenting this is becoming increasingly important as LHD accreditation is being seen as one approach to standardization of inputs. This article provides a literature Review of LHD performance measurement and attempts to identify LHD inputs (or characteristics) that impact performance or outcomes. The literature Review identified 23 articles on LHD performance, published in peer-reviewed journals since the 1988 Report on the Future of Public Health. The most common findings Related to LHD size, jurisdictional size, and funding: LHDs with larger staffs, serving populations of more than 50 000 persons, and with higher funding per capita were more often higher performing. Other notable characteristics of higher-performing LHDs included greater community interaction, having a director with higher academic degrees, and leadership functioning within a management team. Prospective studies that examine the linkages among LHD performance measurement, accreditation, and outcomes will be important in achieving performance improvement over time.