Skip Navigation
 

Lastly, Dr. Fielding inquired how much it would cost to design and start building the system that is described in the report. Dr. Manderscheid responded that he has not estimated the cost, but would produce a range so that HHS could use that information for decision-making purposes. Dr. Fielding requested a motion to approve the report with the modifications that had been discussed, and to entrust Dr. Kumanyika and him to approve the final version once those changes have been made. A member moved to approve the report, and the motion was seconded.

  • All Committee members who were present voted to approve the System Specifications report with suggested modifications.

VI. Phase II Subcommittee Charges

Dr. Fielding reviewed the list of subcommittees and charges that the Committee developed at their January meeting. The preliminary charges are shown in the list below, along with suggested revisions or additions.

  1. Subcommittee on Priorities: (Co-Chairs, David Meltzer, Abby King)

    Preliminary Charge: How do we think about priorities at the national, state, and local level?

    Dr. Fielding indicated that a general charge was appropriate for the Subcommittee on Priorities at this time, although members could further refine the charge once they have met.
  2. Topic Areas & Objectives: (Chair, Patrick Remington)

    Preliminary Charge: Organize the list of Healthy People 2010 objectives into homogenous categories. Add any that are missing.

    Dr. Fielding emphasized that topics should not be “pigeon-holed” into categories. Others stated that topic areas should not all be concentrated in the health sector, but should incorporate other impacts on health dealing with the social and physical determinants of health outcomes.
  3. Evidence & Target-Setting: (Chair, Patrick Remington)

    Preliminary Charge: Create a transparent process for target-setting that communities can use to set their own objectives. Create evidence-based public health practices.

    Targets could be used at the local, state, regional, or national levels. Evidence-based practices to improve health at the population level should also be incorporated. A member emphasized transparency for 2020 and the need to be clear about how targets were set and achieved. This charge should be revised to state that, “transparent processes (plural) can be used to set objectives for multiple users, at multiple levels.”

    Dr. Kumanyika asked whether this subcommittee would deal with targets that change along the way (e.g., if new evidence becomes available). Dr. Fielding felt that this was a broad issue that the Committee as a whole should discuss later in the year to suggest how often targets should be revisited, what the process for reviewing them should be, and how targets should be changed.
  4. Implementation: (Co-Chairs, Eva Moya, Adewale Troutman)

    Preliminary Charge: Reflect on the range of potential users at the national, state, and community levels. What are their needs for tools, aids, and guidance for communities?

    Dr. Fielding asked about the issues of performance monitoring and incentives for achieving goals and objectives. Also, another bullet is needed to identify the mechanisms needed to assure accountability and high performance among those who are charged with improving the public’s health. He noted that, for the sake of a realistic timeline, it may be necessary to phase this work.
  5. Data & IT Issues (Chair, Ron Manderscheid)

    Preliminary Charge: Interface with NCHS to determine their needs and capabilities. Determine issues related to working with partners for data and the role of Health IT.