14
Criteria for Cross- Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion groups in the Northwoods Shared Services Project, April 2014

Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Criteria forCross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public HealthPerspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion groups in the Northwoods Shared Services Project, April 2014

Page 2: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

A Roadmap for Sharing:ExplorePrepare & PlanImplement & Improve

Source: Center for Sharing Public Health Services

Page 3: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Goals and Expectations:

Is in alignment with our mission and core values

Evidence based and when applicable, designed to improve population health

Accomplish at least one of the following:Achieve an essential public health serviceAdvance initiatives in a priority area in our community health planEnhance the quality of the existing serviceImprove capacity for achieving public health accreditation

Why Consider CJS?

Page 4: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Scope of the Agreement

Assures adequate service levels for the investment of resources for our agency

The agreement is clear about which services will NOT be shared, including: Functions (e.g. billing, human resources, information technology)Programs and Capacity (e.g. WIC, environmental health, epidemiology, lab)

Page 5: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Partners and Stakeholders

Have experience working together in CJS agreements, trust each other and have an understanding of the culture and history of each jurisdiction

Adequate support for the CJS from policymakers, constituents, clients, and other stakeholders who may be affected by it

Relationships

Public Support

Page 6: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Partners and Stakeholders

The proposed outcomes, service model and delivery, and staffing model feasible and supported by the partners, stakeholders and others affected by the CJS initiative.

The partners are in agreement on their respective roles and responsibilities and they are willing to enter into a written agreement.

Policymaker & Stakeholder Support

Written Agreements

Page 7: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Fiscal & Service Implications

Is there a service benefit such as:New services for less money than could be achieved by doing it aloneEnhanced quality of service for an affordable investment?

Service

Page 8: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Fiscal & Service Implications

Is there a fiscal benefit such as:Savings through avoiding capital costs over the medium and long term (3-10 years)Reduced annual rates of increase in expendituresDecreased annual operating costNo increase in annual operating costsLower than expected rate of increase in annual operating costs?

Fiscal

Page 9: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Fiscal & Service Implications

Funding is adequate to support staff and resources needed to meet program/service outcomes

Funds pay for the increased indirect costs to the lead agency

Funding is at least 2 – 5 years versus one-time, one year funding that is unlikely to be sustainable

There is a plan for sustainable funding

Funding

Page 10: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Leadership

The lead agency has experience managing CJS arrangements and the appropriate infrastructure in place for all reporting requirements

Lead Agency

Page 11: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Personnel

Can we recruit staff from the area workforce with the desired expertise in the location(s) needed?

Page 12: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health

In Summary:Goals and ExpectationsScope of the AgreementPartners and StakeholdersFiscal and Service ImplicationsLeadershipPersonnel

Page 13: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Northwoods Public Health Community: Shared Services Learning Community Grant

Acknowledgements:

This work was funded by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Center for Sharing Public Health Services

Fiscal Agent and Contact for the Grant:

Marathon County Health Department

www.co.marathon.wi.us/Departments/HealthDepartment

Page 14: Criteria for Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing in Public Health Perspectives from a literature review, health officers interviews and policymakers discussion

Northwoods Public Health Community: Shared Services Learning Community Grant

Grant Partners:Ashland County Health & Human ServicesBayfield County Health Dept.Florence County Health Dept.Forest County Health Dept.Iron County Health Dept.Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior ChippewaLCO - send reminders to her alsoLanglade County Health Dept.Lincoln County Health Dept.Marathon County Health Dept.

Marinette County Health & Human Services

Oneida County Health Dept.

Portage Co. Health & Human Services Dept.

Price Co. Health & Human Services

Sawyer County Health & Human Services

Shawano-Menominee Counties Health Department

Taylor County Health Dept.

Vilas County Health Dept. Wood County Health

Dept.