Assessing Local Public Health Governance in North Carolina Across Organizational and Governance Configurations.

Q2 Medicine
Karl Johnson, Juan Yanguela Eguizabal, Dorothy Cilenti, John Wiesman, Todd Jensen, Kristen Hassmiller Lich
{"title":"Assessing Local Public Health Governance in North Carolina Across Organizational and Governance Configurations.","authors":"Karl Johnson, Juan Yanguela Eguizabal, Dorothy Cilenti, John Wiesman, Todd Jensen, Kristen Hassmiller Lich","doi":"10.18043/001c.121368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Every county in North Carolina must include a board of health (BOH) with specific prescribed duties and powers. It is unclear how BOHs in North Carolina are currently exercising their governance ability. In 2012, the North Carolina General Assembly provided coun-ties with additional flexibility to select among different configurations for their local health department (LHD). The impact of this flexibility on the governance and service delivery of LHDs is yet to be explored.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with LHD directors and BOH members to assess the strengths and weaknesses of BOHs within different local public health configurations across North Carolina. We employed conventional content analysis to derive themes from the interview transcripts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>BOHs were largely described as an underutilized institution, with few BOHs noted to be active beyond satisfying their required legal duties. Strong BOHs were noted to fulfill three identities on behalf of the LHD: an advocate, a bridge, and an advisor. The majority of interviewees desired to work in a standalone county health department (as opposed to a consolidated human services agency) with an appointed (versus elected) board of health. This configuration was preferred because, according to participants, it is more likely to enable a structural focus on public health initiatives.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our sample frame did not control for the length of time an interviewee had been in the office nor the professional background of each BOH member.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Wide variations exist in the exercise of BOHs across the state, partially due to how different LHD configurations structurally focus resources and attention on public health.</p>","PeriodicalId":39574,"journal":{"name":"North Carolina Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North Carolina Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18043/001c.121368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Every county in North Carolina must include a board of health (BOH) with specific prescribed duties and powers. It is unclear how BOHs in North Carolina are currently exercising their governance ability. In 2012, the North Carolina General Assembly provided coun-ties with additional flexibility to select among different configurations for their local health department (LHD). The impact of this flexibility on the governance and service delivery of LHDs is yet to be explored.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with LHD directors and BOH members to assess the strengths and weaknesses of BOHs within different local public health configurations across North Carolina. We employed conventional content analysis to derive themes from the interview transcripts.

Results: BOHs were largely described as an underutilized institution, with few BOHs noted to be active beyond satisfying their required legal duties. Strong BOHs were noted to fulfill three identities on behalf of the LHD: an advocate, a bridge, and an advisor. The majority of interviewees desired to work in a standalone county health department (as opposed to a consolidated human services agency) with an appointed (versus elected) board of health. This configuration was preferred because, according to participants, it is more likely to enable a structural focus on public health initiatives.

Limitations: Our sample frame did not control for the length of time an interviewee had been in the office nor the professional background of each BOH member.

Conclusions: Wide variations exist in the exercise of BOHs across the state, partially due to how different LHD configurations structurally focus resources and attention on public health.

评估北卡罗来纳州跨组织和治理配置的地方公共卫生治理。
背景:北卡罗来纳州的每个县都必须设立一个卫生委员会 (BOH),并规定其具体的职责和权力。目前尚不清楚北卡罗来纳州的卫生委员会是如何行使其治理能力的。2012 年,北卡罗来纳州议会为各县提供了更多的灵活性,使其可以从不同的地方卫生部门(LHD)配置中进行选择。这种灵活性对地方卫生局的治理和服务提供的影响还有待探讨:我们对地方卫生局局长和地方卫生局成员进行了半结构化访谈,以评估北卡罗来纳州不同地方公共卫生机构配置中地方卫生局的优缺点。我们采用了传统的内容分析法,从访谈记录中得出主题:大多数人认为公共卫生机构是一个未得到充分利用的机构,很少有公共卫生机构在履行其法定职责之外还积极开展活动。受访者指出,有实力的博爱医院代表地方卫生局履行三种职责:倡导者、桥梁和顾问。大多数受访者希望在一个独立的县卫生局(而不是一个综合的人类服务机构)工作,并由一个任命的(而不是选举产生的)卫生委员会领导。受访者更倾向于这种配置,因为据受访者称,这种配置更有可能实现对公共卫生倡议的结构性关注:局限性:我们的抽样框架没有控制受访者任职时间的长短,也没有控制每个卫生委员会成员的专业背景:全州各地州卫生局的工作存在很大差异,部分原因是不同的地方卫生局结构如何将资源和注意力集中在公共卫生上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
North Carolina Medical Journal
North Carolina Medical Journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: NCMJ, the North Carolina Medical Journal, is meant to be read by everyone with an interest in improving the health of North Carolinians. We seek to make the Journal a sounding board for new ideas, new approaches, and new policies that will deliver high quality health care, support healthy choices, and maintain a healthy environment in our state.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信