Objective 8.14 of the Year 2000 National Health Objectives calls for 90 percent of the population to be served by a local health department effectively carrying out the three core functions of public health--assessment, policy development, and assurance. To provide a benchmark of local health department effectiveness in addressing the core functions and to assess implications for achieving the year 2000 target, a random national sample (stratified by jurisdiction and population base) of local health departments was surveyed to determine self-reported compliance with 10 public health practice performance measures that operationalize the core functions. Overall compliance with the 10 performance measures was 50 percent, based on weighted responses of 208 responding health departments. Compliance was highest for the practices related to the assurance function and least for practices related to the policy development function. Compliance was also high for departments serving a population of 50,000 or more and those smaller departments organized at the city and city-county levels. Using two different definitions developed by the investigators, 19 and 31 percent of the health departments were judged to be effective in addressing the core functions of public health. These data suggest that less than 40 percent of the U.S. population was served by a health department effectively addressing the core functions of public health in 1993. It appears that considerable capacity building within the public health system will be needed to achieve the year 2000 target of 90 percent.

Community Health Services↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Mental health: hair today ... gone tomorrow.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Career Mobility↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Poor share options.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Employment↗

PubMedDate not supplied

A strategy for measuring local public health practice.

The national health objectives for the year 2000 call for 90% of the population to be served by a local health department (LHD) that is effectively addressing the core functions of public health. Achieving this objective requires approved definitions for effectiveness as well as a system for ascertainment. In 1990 when this objective was established, no baseline data were available, and no accepted methods of measuring health department effectiveness were in use. Our approach to the development of a surveillance system to measure the effectiveness of LHDs has been to translate the three core public health functions characterized by the Institute of Medicine and the 10 practices delineated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the national public health practice organizations into practice performance measures that could be judged as met or not met at the level of a jurisdiction served by a LHD. As part of our effort to develop a surveillance system to measure local public health practice, performance measures that characterize the 10 public health practices and their related core functions were developed and field-tested with state local health liaison officials and local health departments over a two-year period. Obtaining input from these sources is essential to establishing their validity and is a critical aspect of building nationwide consensus for appropriate measures of effective local public health practice. The results of these efforts led to the establishment of a proposed surveillance instrument comprising 10 performance standards and 29 associated indicators. We describe two approaches to its use.

Community Health Services↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Roles for state-level local health liaison officials in local public health surveillance and capacity building.

In 27 state health agencies, local health liaison units or officials (LHLOs) are formally assigned responsibility for fostering a close working relationship between the state health agency and local health departments (LHDs). Yet in most other states, other agency staff carry out these responsibilities informally. Even where formal LHLOs exist, the assigned functions and specific activities vary, with little consistency across states other than serving as a potential or, in most cases, a real and vital linkage between LHDs and the state agency. This linkage places the LHLO in a unique position to have extensive knowledge, data, and information on LHD activities and to play an important role in assessing and improving local public health practice. This report examines aspects of the LHLO-LHD relationship in terms of potential LHLO roles in LHD practice surveillance and capacity building. Surveys of LHLOs and LHDs indicate that both support the development of surveillance tools to measure LHD effectiveness as a means to enhance capacity building efforts. Although LHLOs may not know or have the specific information immediately available to assess local public health practice for LHDs in their state, they report being able to obtain the information if necessary and with sufficient time. Further, LHDs are willing to share information concerning local public health practice with their state health department, particularly with their state LHLO. These findings suggest that LHLOs could be extensively involved in surveillance strategies beyond merely collecting and aggregating information provided by LHDs.

Administrative Personnel↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Express your support for breast-feeding.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Breast Feeding↗