Chronic disease programs at the
Texas Department of State Health Services changed from a paper reporting system
for staff and contractors to an electronic and web based data collection
process in order to track local efforts at policy and environmental change. The
two programs involved were the Cardiovascular Health and Wellness program and
the Office of Tobacco Prevention & Control (now the Risk Assessment Group).
The intended outcomes of this
program were improved program management data. This data is then used to set
work measures for staff and contractors to reflect policy/environmental change
process activities.
Cardiovascular Health &
Wellness implemented their Policy & Environmental Change Indicator
Reporting System (PECIRS) in 1997 with an electronic reporting form. Risk
Assessment Group (then OTPC) implemented their Program Management and Tracking
System (PMATS) as a web based reporting system in 2003.
Policy Initiation
Program staff identified a gap in
their data collection that did not allow for them to identify, track
information beyond outcome data with the previous system. There is a need to be
able to collect information on the activities that go into creating a
policy/environmental change as part of the overall program management. This
allows staff and contractors to focus on making the changes rather than just on
the “widget count” used for outcome measures and for outcome measures to be
changed in order to count process activities involved in policy/environmental
changes as part of the staff/contractor’s overall work measures.
Public Health Agency Roles
Both the Cardiovascular Health
& Wellness and the Risk Assessment Group are programs within the Texas
Department of State Health Services and located in the agency’s main
headquarters in
Major Partners
PECIRS was developed by
MicroAssist, a private contractor in
PMATS
was developed by the
Official Support
Philip Huang, MD, MPH, who was
then the chief of the Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention & Control, Texas
Department of State Health Services. Both of the programs involved in this
effort were part of this bureau. (Dr. Huang is now a physician consultant to
the Health Promotion Unit. Though the programs still exist, the bureau itself
was eliminated during reorganization due to a merger with other state
agencies.) Jennifer Smith, MSHP,
director, Cardiovascular Health & Wellness; Kim Roberts, former manager,
Office of Tobacco Prevention & Control; and Anne Williamson, MEd, former director, Risk Assessment Group also
supported this effort.
Results from the Policy
Both programs are tracking
reported data in order to measure process outcomes of staff and contractors
towards making policy and environmental changes at the local level concerning
their specific workload measures.
The
reporting systems themselves are monitored to insure that information collected
meets the needs of the program and funding agencies. Users are also surveyed to
insure that the reporting systems themselves are user friendly in order to
facilitate the input of data by staff and contractors. This monitoring is by
central office staff and reporting system contractors at the
Opposition
There was not much opposition
to this program. The support for the program to develop electronic reporting
came from within our management structure which not only gave the okay but also
gave approval to expend funds to create the programs.
Most of the staff, central
and regional, were already reporting their activities so this just became the
new way to report their measurers. The electronic reporting provided an
improved methodology for reporting activities so that staff were able to
capture their efforts not just their outcomes (which is particularly important
when working with communities and worksites on environmental and policy
changes). For contractors, this was the method of reporting activities and was
tied to reimbursement and contract renewals.
That said, there were
naturally some staff who easily embraced the new method of reporting and some
who were late comers. But most of the late comers weren't opposed to the
specific methodology of reporting, they just didn't like having to deal with
the bureaucratic paperwork of reporting that is a necessary evil of any
organization. But when they saw how it helped them by getting credit for all of
their efforts (which can play back to funding and promotion opportunities) the
late comers came on board pretty quick.
Lessons Learned
For programs to measure their
success, they must have data that is accessible, current (i.e. real time), and
complete. The systems to report that data have to be user friendly, flexible
and provide a method to insure accuracy. The reporting system has to be able to
meet the data needs of the users, the program managers and the funding agencies
with ever changing needs.
By creating a system that allows
those in the field to report data (either on a daily, weekly or monthly basis)
with the ability to run the same reports as those run by program managers,
field staff are more motivated to address long-term policy and environmental
change activities knowing that their efforts will count towards work measures,
even if the change itself does not occur (i.e. a city council voting down a
policy).
Submitted By
Barry
Sharp, MSHP, CHES
(Program
Specialist, Risk Assessment Group at time of submission)
Planning Specialist, Community Preparedness Section
Texas Department of State Health Services
1100
512-458-7111 x2665
512-458-7211 FAX