Wendy Ellis,Kristen Hayes,Esmeralda Salas,Stephanie A Bultema,Tahlia Gousse,Kuan-Lung Daniel Chen
{"title":"解决系统性不平等:公共卫生复原力催化剂计划评估》。","authors":"Wendy Ellis,Kristen Hayes,Esmeralda Salas,Stephanie A Bultema,Tahlia Gousse,Kuan-Lung Daniel Chen","doi":"10.1097/phh.0000000000002053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CONTEXT\r\nResilience Catalysts (RC) in Public Health provides local health departments (LHDs) with a process and technical assistance (TA) to operationalize the Community Health Strategist (CHS) role, foster equity, and support community resilience through policy, practice, and program change across multiple sectors.\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVES\r\nThis evaluation sought to (1) identify essential elements of the RC process and TA that help LHDs address the systemic drivers of adversity and inequity, and (2) expand understanding of RC's preliminary impact and inform implications for theory, practice, and funding in the post-COVID context.\r\n\r\nDESIGN\r\nThe mixed-methods evaluation incorporated online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Key themes and takeaways were identified using framework analysis, constant comparison analysis, and descriptive statistics.\r\n\r\nSETTING\r\nThe evaluation was conducted in 12 cities and counties across the United States, including California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington.\r\n\r\nPARTICIPANTS\r\nSurvey participants consisted of 29 representatives of 11 RC sites. Interview participants included 33 individuals: 19 representatives of 9 RC sites and 14 individuals representing RC TA providers and funders.\r\n\r\nMAIN OUTCOME MEASURES\r\nThe evaluation measured outcomes related to collaborative engagement, addressing inequity, systems change, knowledge change, ability to work within a local political and community context, sustainability, and scalability.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nEvaluation results demonstrate outcomes related to community engagement, expansion of system-level thinking, advancing health and racial equity, clarity and understanding of RC process, building LHD and partners' capacity and skills needed to embody the CHS role.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nThe RC process prepared LHDs to operationalize the CHS role by providing the knowledge, skills, and capacities needed to understand root causes of adversity and inequity, address structural racism as a public health issue, and develop collaborative plans for addressing root causes.","PeriodicalId":520109,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Management & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing Systemic Inequities: An Evaluation of the Resilience Catalysts in Public Health Program.\",\"authors\":\"Wendy Ellis,Kristen Hayes,Esmeralda Salas,Stephanie A Bultema,Tahlia Gousse,Kuan-Lung Daniel Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/phh.0000000000002053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"CONTEXT\\r\\nResilience Catalysts (RC) in Public Health provides local health departments (LHDs) with a process and technical assistance (TA) to operationalize the Community Health Strategist (CHS) role, foster equity, and support community resilience through policy, practice, and program change across multiple sectors.\\r\\n\\r\\nOBJECTIVES\\r\\nThis evaluation sought to (1) identify essential elements of the RC process and TA that help LHDs address the systemic drivers of adversity and inequity, and (2) expand understanding of RC's preliminary impact and inform implications for theory, practice, and funding in the post-COVID context.\\r\\n\\r\\nDESIGN\\r\\nThe mixed-methods evaluation incorporated online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Key themes and takeaways were identified using framework analysis, constant comparison analysis, and descriptive statistics.\\r\\n\\r\\nSETTING\\r\\nThe evaluation was conducted in 12 cities and counties across the United States, including California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington.\\r\\n\\r\\nPARTICIPANTS\\r\\nSurvey participants consisted of 29 representatives of 11 RC sites. Interview participants included 33 individuals: 19 representatives of 9 RC sites and 14 individuals representing RC TA providers and funders.\\r\\n\\r\\nMAIN OUTCOME MEASURES\\r\\nThe evaluation measured outcomes related to collaborative engagement, addressing inequity, systems change, knowledge change, ability to work within a local political and community context, sustainability, and scalability.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nEvaluation results demonstrate outcomes related to community engagement, expansion of system-level thinking, advancing health and racial equity, clarity and understanding of RC process, building LHD and partners' capacity and skills needed to embody the CHS role.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nThe RC process prepared LHDs to operationalize the CHS role by providing the knowledge, skills, and capacities needed to understand root causes of adversity and inequity, address structural racism as a public health issue, and develop collaborative plans for addressing root causes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":520109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Health Management & Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Health Management & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/phh.0000000000002053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Management & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/phh.0000000000002053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
CONTEXTResilience Catalysts (RC) in Public Health (LHDs) 为地方卫生部门(LHDs)提供流程和技术援助(TA),以落实社区卫生战略家(CHS)的角色,促进公平,并通过跨多个部门的政策、实践和计划变革来支持社区复原力。该评估旨在:(1)确定 RC 流程和技术援助的基本要素,以帮助地方保健发展机构解决逆境和不平等的系统性驱动因素;(2)扩大对 RC 初步影响的理解,并为后 COVID 环境下的理论、实践和资金提供信息。采用框架分析法、恒定比较分析法和描述性统计法确定了关键主题和收获。地点评估在美国的 12 个城市和县进行,包括加利福尼亚州、科罗拉多州、佛罗里达州、爱荷华州、肯塔基州、马里兰州、马萨诸塞州、新泽西州、北卡罗来纳州、俄亥俄州、田纳西州和华盛顿州。访谈参与者包括 33 人:主要结果测量评估测量了与合作参与、解决不公平问题、系统变革、知识变革、在当地政治和社区背景下工作的能力、可持续性和可扩展性有关的结果。结果评估结果显示了与社区参与、扩展系统级思维、促进健康和种族公平、明确和理解 RC 流程、建设 LHD 和合作伙伴体现 CHS 角色所需的能力和技能相关的成果。结论RC 流程通过提供理解逆境和不公平的根本原因所需的知识、技能和能力,解决作为公共卫生问题的结构性种族主义,并制定解决根本原因的合作计划,为 LHD 履行 CHS 角色做好了准备。
Addressing Systemic Inequities: An Evaluation of the Resilience Catalysts in Public Health Program.
CONTEXT
Resilience Catalysts (RC) in Public Health provides local health departments (LHDs) with a process and technical assistance (TA) to operationalize the Community Health Strategist (CHS) role, foster equity, and support community resilience through policy, practice, and program change across multiple sectors.
OBJECTIVES
This evaluation sought to (1) identify essential elements of the RC process and TA that help LHDs address the systemic drivers of adversity and inequity, and (2) expand understanding of RC's preliminary impact and inform implications for theory, practice, and funding in the post-COVID context.
DESIGN
The mixed-methods evaluation incorporated online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Key themes and takeaways were identified using framework analysis, constant comparison analysis, and descriptive statistics.
SETTING
The evaluation was conducted in 12 cities and counties across the United States, including California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington.
PARTICIPANTS
Survey participants consisted of 29 representatives of 11 RC sites. Interview participants included 33 individuals: 19 representatives of 9 RC sites and 14 individuals representing RC TA providers and funders.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The evaluation measured outcomes related to collaborative engagement, addressing inequity, systems change, knowledge change, ability to work within a local political and community context, sustainability, and scalability.
RESULTS
Evaluation results demonstrate outcomes related to community engagement, expansion of system-level thinking, advancing health and racial equity, clarity and understanding of RC process, building LHD and partners' capacity and skills needed to embody the CHS role.
CONCLUSIONS
The RC process prepared LHDs to operationalize the CHS role by providing the knowledge, skills, and capacities needed to understand root causes of adversity and inequity, address structural racism as a public health issue, and develop collaborative plans for addressing root causes.