Sandhu Nimrat K, Mendoza Ana Lucia, Pokhrel Mamata, Renteria Melissa, Bristow Kim, Brown Paul M
Authors' Affiliation: Health Sciences Research Institute, University of California, Merced, Merced, California.
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2025;31(3):384-391. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000002082. Epub 2024 Dec 5.
Prioritization is an essential task of local health departments (LHDs). We examined the alignment of priorities reported in Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNA) with priorities in the Community Health Improvement Plans (CHIP). We report factors that influence the choice of priorities and the alignment of the priorities.
A mixed method study design.
California.
CHNA and CHIP documents were sought for all 58 counties. Interviews were conducted with 19 state and local public health officials.
The priorities in the CHNA and the CHIP were coded as i) only in the CHNA, ii) only in the CHIP, or iii) in both the CHNA and the CHIP. The interviewees were asked to share their experiences related to issue prioritization and decision-making in public health agencies. The interviews were coded and thematically analyzed to identify barriers and facilitators of the prioritization process.
The alignment between the needs prioritized in CHNA and the priorities targeted in CHIP was 35%. The interviews identify reasons for the misalignment, including a need to include priorities in the CHNA even though LHDs are not able to address them, political factors that influence the selection of priorities, and a lack of discretionary funding or capacity/expertise within the agency or its community partners to respond to the needs identified. The lack of discretionary funding was particularly acute for smaller (rural) LHDs (CMSP) and resulted in their often having to focus on priorities where there was state or federal funding.
LHDs face numerous challenges in aligning the priorities reported in the CHNA and the priorities they focus upon in the CHIP. LHDs should consider using a formal, transparent, and evidence-based approach to setting aligning. Future research should focus on developing a formal decision-making process that is appropriate for local public health decision-making.
确定优先事项是地方卫生部门(LHDs)的一项重要任务。我们研究了社区卫生需求评估(CHNA)中报告的优先事项与社区卫生改善计划(CHIP)中的优先事项是否一致。我们报告了影响优先事项选择和优先事项一致性的因素。
混合方法研究设计。
加利福尼亚州。
收集了加利福尼亚州58个县的CHNA和CHIP文件。对19名州和地方公共卫生官员进行了访谈。
CHNA和CHIP中的优先事项被编码为:i)仅在CHNA中;ii)仅在CHIP中;iii)同时在CHNA和CHIP中。受访者被要求分享他们在公共卫生机构中与问题优先排序和决策相关的经验。对访谈进行编码并进行主题分析,以确定优先排序过程中的障碍和促进因素。
CHNA中确定的需求优先事项与CHIP中确定的优先事项之间的一致性为35%。访谈确定了不一致的原因,包括即使地方卫生部门无法解决某些问题,也需要将其列入CHNA的优先事项中、影响优先事项选择的政治因素,以及机构或其社区合作伙伴缺乏可自由支配的资金或能力/专业知识来应对所确定的需求。对于较小的(农村)地方卫生部门(CMSP)来说,缺乏可自由支配的资金问题尤为严重,这导致它们往往不得不将重点放在有州或联邦资金支持的优先事项上。
地方卫生部门在使CHNA中报告的优先事项与CHIP中关注的优先事项保持一致方面面临诸多挑战。地方卫生部门应考虑采用正式、透明且基于证据的方法来实现一致性。未来的研究应侧重于开发一种适合地方公共卫生决策的正式决策过程。