Last data update: May 13, 2024. (Total: 46773 publications since 2009)
Records 1-3 (of 3 Records) |
Query Trace: Pyron T[original query] |
---|
Examining comprehensive cancer control partnerships, plans, and program interventions: successes and lessons learned from a utilization-focused evaluation
Pyron T , Fonseka J , Young M , Zimmerman L , Moore AR , Hayes N . Cancer Causes Control 2018 29 (12) 1163-1171 The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program has experienced exponential growth over the past 20 years due to the coordination and collaboration of many stakeholders to sustain multisector coalitions, develop and execute data-driven plans, and successfully implement evidenced-based interventions across the United States. These stakeholders have worked tirelessly to address the burden of cancer by employing strategies that promote healthy behaviors to reduce cancer risk, facilitate screening, and address the needs of cancer survivors. The interaction between the comprehensive cancer control program and the coalitions to engage in this work has been coined the 3Ps: the partnership, the CCC plan, and CCC program interventions. This article describes the efforts to evaluate the growth of the comprehensive cancer control movement, especially as it pertains to coalition contribution, plan priority development and implementation, and intervention implementation. It describes successes and lessons learned from an evaluation whose findings can be used to bolster and sustain comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions across the U.S. |
Leveraging the revised National Public Health Performance Standards to meet today's ever-changing public health system landscape
Daub T , Doshi S , Elligers JJ , Pavletic D , Pyron T . J Public Health Manag Pract 2014 20 (1) 135-7 This article is a commentary on leveraging the revised National Public Health Performance Standards to meet today's ever-changing public health system landscape. | The role of health departments in delivering the 10 essential public health services (EPHS) is important to fulfilling public health's mission to ensure the conditions in which people can be healthy.1,2 This mission has never been one that can be achieved by health departments acting alone.1,2 However, recent public health program cuts and job losses have highlighted a need for increased collaboration between health departments and their system partners.3 The 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act also generated new opportunities for health departments to work with system partners to improve the public's health.4,5 | For the past decade, the National Public Health Performance Standards (NPHPS), versions 1 and 2, have offered tools to assess the performance of state and local public health systems (PHS) on the 10 EPHS.6,7 In 2013, these NPHPS were revised (version 3) to provide health departments and their system partners with an updated tool for assessing and improving performance within the context of existing organizational challenges and a constantly changing landscape of public health services. With the release of NPHPS version 3 and the 2011 launch of a national public health agency accreditation system by the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB), both agency and system performance improvement tools now exist. |
Improving public health through state health improvement planning: a framework for action
Marshall D , Pyron T , Jimenez J , Coffman J , Pearsol J , Koester D . J Public Health Manag Pract 2014 20 (1) 23-8 BACKGROUND: State health improvement plans (SHIPs) identify priorities for making the greatest impacts on health promotion and disease prevention, specific to the needs of state populations. Both SHIPs and the state health assessments on which they are based are prerequisites for Public Health Accreditation Board national accreditation. OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate existing SHIPs to develop guidance to support health departments in the state health improvement planning process. DESIGN: In 2010, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) conducted a comprehensive search for existing SHIPs. A systematic evaluation of existing SHIPS was accomplished by means of primary source document review using a standardized data collection form. Using data derived from these SHIPs and guidance from a workgroup of practitioners, ASTHO developed the ASTHO SHIP Guidance and Resources (SHIP Guidance) Framework. RESULTS: The search yielded 25 states (49%) having a SHIP completed or in progress. Fifteen states (29%) had no SHIP but had a Healthy People plan, and 10 states (20%) had no SHIP or Healthy People plan. No information was available for 1 state. Findings were reviewed, evaluated, and incorporated into the SHIP Guidance. The SHIP Guidance provides a framework for the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of a SHIP process using 12 key steps. CONCLUSIONS: As public health/health care integration and accreditation readiness activity grows, multisector engagement through a SHIP will continue to be a priority for state public health and improving health outcomes. The SHIP Guidance provides a systematic, flexible approach for states conducting or updating state health assessments and SHIPs. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 13, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure