Washington State 2005 Needs Assessment

1
Washington State 2005 Needs Assessment March 3,
2007 Jan Fleming, MN http//www.doh.wa.go
v/cfh/mch/MCHPriorities.htm

2
Washington State Title V
3
Purpose

• Conceptual Framework for 2005 Needs Assessment
• Process, including
• Leadership team
• Stakeholder involvement
• Use of logic models
• Issue briefs
• Outcomes
• Key take-home messages
  

4
(No Transcript)
5
Office of Maternal and Child Health

• Organizational structure
• Six sections 82 FTEs
• MCH Management Team
• Extended Management Team
• Team Approach to work
• Cross office and cross divisional work
• Multiple Stakeholder Groups

6
Conceptual Framework

• We wanted
• Comprehensive, integrated approach
• Strength based vs. deficit based
• Needs assessment part of strategic planning
• Documents to describe MCH work and role

7
The Process

• First steps
• What do we know what do we need to know?
• Cross sectional workgroup
• Reviewed existing data needs assessments,
  reports, issue briefs
• Gathered data sources
• Compared data to national measures and feedback
  from stakeholders

8
The Process

• Asked what does it take to have a healthy
  pregnant woman infant child youth, adolescent,
  family?
• Listed attributes and preliminary needs for
  each population group (30 45 in the lists)
• Surveyed key stakeholders

9
Logic Models

• Logic model for each preliminary priority
• Analysis revealed overlap, as we expected
• Consolidated to a final number of 9
• Validated conceptual approach

10
Leadership Team Role

• Reviewed each priority in depth
• Identified activities within each priority for
  each population group
• Identified best practices, data sources, and
  existing state and national performance measures
  for each priority.

11
Leadership Team Role

• Shared priorities within division, with
  stakeholders, MCHB
• How would stakeholders use them?
• MCHB said ok !

12
Leadership Team Role

• Issue Briefs
• Created issue briefs for each priority
• Intro data, activities for each population group
• Relationship to other public health agendas such
  as HP 2010 DOH/CFH strategic plans, public
  health improvement plan.
• Work in progress

13
OUTCOMES

• Priority Outcomes vs. Needs
• Useful in framing issues
• Documents inform and educate
• Success in integrating with other efforts
• Guidance for work in all MCH sections
• Useful in current budget decisions

14
Take Home Messages

• Have the courage to try something new
• Involve stakeholders in a meaningful way
• Use the needs assessment process as part of your
  on going strategic planning

15
Questions?