Agenda Topic 5.
State-level Healthy People Efforts
ODPHP explained that it is working on a project to assess Phase I of
Healthy People 2020 at the state level. Once the Phase I framework is
released, state agencies such as state health departments will use the
framework to inform their own planning efforts. ODPHP is working on a
project to support competitive grants for states for assessing the use of
the Healthy People 2020 framework. RADM Royall said that the Committee
should discuss state-level efforts during the December meeting, since the
Request for Proposal will be released in January. Committee members agreed
this topic is important, especially since they were involved in Healthy
People efforts in their respective states. Ms. Blakey explained that NORC
recently sent out surveys to state Healthy People Coordinators and Chronic
Disease Directors to find out how they are using Healthy People.
Preliminary findings of these surveys may be available by December. Dr.
Fielding said this information would be very valuable. He asked Dr.
Remington to lead discussion of state-level Healthy People efforts and how
the Committee can add value. (December)
Agenda Topic 6.
Quality and Availability of National Data Sets
A Committee member suggested that the availability and quality of
national data sets an agenda item. Specifically, he mentioned the quality
of national epidemiological and health services be data to reach into
subgroups of interest for measuring health disparities and health equity.
A representative from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)
could present on the main issues confronted as they implement data systems
over time. ODPHP agreed to contact NCHS to see whether such a
presentation could be arranged. (January)
A Committee member later added that the Advisory Committee should
produce a series of questions during the December meeting that NCHS could
answer during the January meeting. She added that the interaction between
regional/local data systems and national data systems is important.
Agenda Topic 7.
Sources of Knowledge for Evidence-based Actions
ODPHP added that another point of discussion could be the action steps
that users can take to achieve targets for individual objectives. Dr.
Fielding noted that this idea relates to sources and use of knowledge.
Specifically, what criteria should be used to decide which interventions
and actions to recommend as being effective? The Advisory Committee must
consider tools that are currently in existence or need to be developed for
different user groups in order to catalyze actions based on objectives.
A brief is needed to describe and how they can be explained to users (for
example, through a toolkit). (January)
Agenda Topic 8.
Selection of Focus Areas
ODPHP added that HHS would be interested in the Advisory Committee’s
feedback on the selection of focus areas. (January)
Agenda Topic 9.
Interventions to Eliminate Health Disparities
Dr. Fielding said it would be important to help people understand the
notions of disparities and inequities. There has been limited research in
this domain, so it will be important to look at the current evidence-base
and future efforts to accumulate evidence of what works to narrow gaps.
Dr. Remington mentioned that he is currently working with colleagues to
review 350 interventions across multiple determinants if health. This
review examines the strength of the evidence, the size of population
impact, and the effect on disparities. Dr. Remington said he would be
happy to share this work-in-progress with Advisory Committee members.
Agenda Topic 10.
Target Setting Methodologies and Met vs. Unmet Targets
Healthy People has used several methodologies for setting targets in
the past (e.g., "better than best," "percentage improvement"). The
Committee’s feedback would be useful. Dr. Fielding agreed this was
valuable, because people do not know how targets were set, or whether they
were realistic. Dr. Kumanyika said an analysis of why some targets have
been met and others have not is important, and deserves time on the
agenda. Dr. Fielding asked whether NORC could put together a briefing
paper of what has been learned from the past (i.e. assessments from past
decades, midcourse review) and what are the critical questions regarding
this issue. (December)
Agenda Topic 11.
User Needs Focus Groups
ODPHP added that user needs focus groups are being conducted and the
results of the findings of these focus groups should be discussed. These
findings could go hand in hand with the implementation/dissemination
strategies discussion. Dr. Fielding agreed that should be placed in the
January meeting’s agenda. (January)
Dissemination of Report, Closing Remarks
Dr. Fielding noted that RADM Royall would provide a list of
organizations that will receive a copy of the Phase I report, which she
will provide to the Advisory Committee. If any important organizations are
missing from that list, the Committee will be able to add to it. He noted
that one possibility would be to have NORC support this effort, but it
would be necessary to verify that such activities are within their scope
of work. A Committee Member requested that NORC put together 10-20 slides
about the Phase I recommendations that could be used to explain them to
stakeholders. Dr. Fielding agreed that those slides would be valuable to
have by the time the Secretary’s 30-day review period elapsed. They could
be distributed along with the final draft of the report.
Dr. Fielding thanked the Committee members for their hard work, and
congratulated them on completing the first phase of their charge. He also
thanked the members of the public who had signed into the WebEx meeting. A
Committee member also thanked Dr. Fielding and Dr. Kumanyika for their
leadership. The meeting was adjourned.