Agenda of the October 27-28, 2014 NCVHS Subcommittee on Population Health Roundtable

• Meeting Outcomes, Agenda & Working Agreements
• Participant Introductions
• How We Got Here

• Opening comments: The new world of CHNA/CHIPs
• Panel Exchange
  

  Brian Vaughn, Sonoma County, CA

  Kay Bender, National Quality Forum

  Jean Nudelman, Kaiser Permanente (via phone)

• Full Group Dialogue

Questions for Panelists:

1. Brief background on your CHNA/CHIP processes & community/communities you serve
   How is this process changing as a result of the new 990 requirements?
2. What specific data sets (types of data) are you using?
   Where do you get the data (quantitative & qualitative) and what does that process for securing the data look like?
3. In what areas do you feel you have really strong data? Areas where you feel you have the weakest data/are getting stuck?
   Have requests for data been denied?
4. Examples of where data has really shaped perception, priorities and/or strategies?
5. Experience with using data to demonstrate impact/outcomes: Working? Challenged?

Discussion in Pairs and Large Group Dialogue:

1. What have you learned that resonates with your experience/observations?
2. New questions or ideas this raises for you?
3. Implications for improving data use in CHNA/CHIPs in the future?

• Community Case Stories
  

  Eric Baumgartner, Louisiana Public Health Institute

  Megan Miller, Assoc. of State & Territorial Health Officials

  Julie Trocchio, National Quality Forum

• Dialogue in pairs and large groups

Topics for Panelists’ Case Studies

8-minute presentations focusing on engaging the public, meaning-making, and participatory action research aimed at community improvement:

1. Brief background on community and areas of focus
2. What’s been the history of engagement?
3. How are you using data within your community engagement processes?
4. Which sectors have provided datasets (public health, health care providers, health plans, community agencies, schools, retail)? Please provide examples from each sector.
5. What’s working? What are the most exciting or promising results? Most challenging? Why?

Topics for Discussion in Pairs & Large Group Dialogue:

1. What did you hear that excites you?
2. What have you experienced/seen real success with data-infused community engagement efforts? What helped drive those successes?
3. What would help us to take data engagement to the next level?

• Community Case Stories
  

  Kerri Peterson, Douglas County, NE

  Nadine Chan, Seattle, WA

• Full Group Dialogue and Discussion
• Reflections on the Morning (two reflectors will call out major themes thus far)

Topics for Community Case Stories:

1. Brief background on community and area of focus
2. Omaha: How have you been using data to develop a shared agenda that includes all sectors and citizens? What does that look like in action? How does it impact collective decisions and investments?
3. Seattle: How have you been using data to drive a shared agenda to improve health equity?
4. Most exciting results? Biggest question you’re struggling with right now?

Topics for Discussion in Pairs/Small Groups & Large Group Dialogue?

1. What did you hear that excites you?
2. In what ways are these community experiences relevant or indicative of future needs and aspirations?
3. What other future needs/aspirations should be on our radar?

Leslie Safier, Healthy Communities Institute

Chris Fulcher, Community Commons

Julie Willems Van Dijk and Patrick Remington, County Health Rankings and Roadmaps

Denise Love, Natl Assn of Health Data Organizations

• What’s your current reality?
• Emerging technologies/future plans

Panel Topics: Each connector will provide context on what they do and what they’re learning in a visual way, and describe:

1. Their primary audience,
2. What they see from a community demand side,
3. How they secure and share data, and
4. Their experience with and needs from data suppliers.

• Large group dialogue

CDC
NCHS
SAMHSA
HRSA
CMS
AHRQ

Data suppliers are asked to serve as ‘reactors’ from their respective agencies’ perspectives about issues and gaps identified by communities and connectors with regard to data availability and policies that could improve community access. Please identify potential changes in agency policy for data collection, data dissemination, and technical support to meet broader community needs. Questions that the reactor panel may wish to consider are:

• How can our data be made easier to use from the community perspective?
• Are we missing major channels of communication/dissemination?
• Could we provide more tools and resources to make our data easier to use?
• What should our role be in providing small geographic area data? Data for population subgroups? More timely, perhaps provisional, data?
• Can we help communities collect data similar to ours but at the community level?
• How can we help communities develop better stewardship practices for the data they use?
• How can our programs be more supportive in this space?

Kathy Hempstead, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

The intent for this segment is to pivot to future possibilities and meld the earlier conversations. Funders have a unique point of view that spans communities, suppliers and connectors. What are they looking, hoping and planning for?

• Small mixed groups will generate what they feel are the most significant patterns, themes and/or potential breakthrough ideas worth pursuing. Essentially, what’s getting traction, gaps, needs, potential solutions?
• This will be followed by large group sharing, including flagging the challenging questions that need further exploration.

• Review of Day One themes and findings; brief comments
• Small group dialogue, identifying 4-6 broad buckets in which to focus gap analysis and recommendations

Bridging the Gaps

Small group discussion, using the From/To Gap Analysis Framework

Bridging Continued…

Continued work in both small and large groups, sharing and testing ideas on gaps and potential solutions. Begin to tease out potential roles for community collaboratives, connectors and suppliers.

Next Steps for Shaping & Vetting Recommendations

Discuss elements that participants would like to make sure are emphasized in the deliverable.
Any other creative ideas for how this might get used – or how it might spur action?