The Prevention Agenda 2013 - 2017
The Prevention Agenda 2013-17 is New York State's health improvement plan for 2013 through 2017, developed by the New York State Public Health and Health Planning Council (PHHPC) at the request of the Department of Health, in partnership with more than 140 organizations across the state. This plan involves a unique mix of organizations including local health departments, health care providers, health plans, community based organizations, advocacy groups, academia, employers as well as state agencies, schools, and businesses whose activities can influence the health of individuals and communities and address health disparities. This unprecedented collaboration informs a five-year plan designed to demonstrate how communities across the state can work together to improve the health and quality of life for all New Yorkers. Recent natural disasters in New York State that have had an impact on health and wellbeing re-emphasize the need for such a roadmap.
In addition, the Prevention Agenda will serve as a guide to local health departments as they work with their community to develop mandated Community Health Assessments and to hospitals as they develop mandated Community Service Plans and Community Health Needs Assessments required by the Affordable Care Act over the coming year.
The Prevention Agenda vision is New York as the Healthiest State in the Nation.1 features five priority areas:
- Prevent chronic diseases
- Promote healthy and safe environments
- Promote healthy women, infants and children
- Promote mental health and prevent substance abuse
- Prevent HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, vaccine-preventable diseases and healthcareassociated Infections
The Prevention Agenda establishes goals for each priority area and defines indicators to measure progress toward achieving these goals, including reductions in health disparities among racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups and persons with disabilities.
The Agenda also identifies interventions shown to be effective to reach each goal. These interventions are displayed by stakeholder groups so that each sector can identify evidence based or promising practices they can adapt for implementation to address the specific health issues in their communities. The interventions are also displayed by the five tiers of the Health Impact Pyramid.2 Health Impact Pyramid is a framework based on the potential reach and relative impact of interventions. At the base are efforts to address socio-economic determinants of health (Tier 1). In ascending order are interventions directed at the environmental context to make individuals' default decisions healthy (Tier 2), clinical interventions that confer long-term protection against illness and disease (Tier 3), ongoing direct clinical care (Tier 4), and health education and counseling (Tier 5). Interventions at lower levels of the pyramid tend to reach broader segments of society by changing the broader environments in which people live through policy changes. Sustaining interventions at each of the levels within communities can achieve the maximum possible public health benefit and address health disparities and social determinants of health.
The Prevention Agenda has five overarching goals:
- Improve health status in five priority areas and reduce racial, ethnic, socioeconomic and other health disparities including those among persons with disabilities.
- Advance a 'Health in all Policies' approach to address broad social determinants of health.
- Create and strengthen public -private and multi-stakeholder partnerships to achieve public health improvement at state and local levels.
- Increase investment in prevention and public health to improve health, control health care costs and increase economic productivity.
- Strengthen governmental and nongovernmental public health agencies and resources at state and local levels.
The Agenda seeks to be a catalyst for action as well as a blueprint for improving health outcomes and reducing health disparities. The key to its success will be the active engagement of local communities. A strategy for statewide communication of the Agenda and support for local community efforts will be developed in consultation with the Ad Hoc Committee which has steered the development of the Prevention Agenda with the Public Health Committee of the PHHPC and scores of organizations from across the state over the past year. One important component of this strategy will be the development of a Framework for Implementation that specifically addresses health disparities and the important role that the community must play, especially communities experiencing the greatest health disparities, in the kinds of multisectoral planning and action needed to improve health outcomes in local communities across the State. A resource document was developed by the Prevent Chronic Disease Committee which will serve as a starting point. The Department will work with the Ad Hoc Committee and the Minority Health Council to finalize the document. The document will focus on the importance of assuring active and effective engagement of community members and organizations, especially those experiencing the greatest health disparities, with local health departments, hospitals, health care providers and payers, and other stakeholders in business, schools and universities, faith based organizations, etc., which must be mobilized at the local level to implement evidence based policies that address the broad determinants of health.
The Prevention Agenda is intended to be a dynamic plan. We intend to create mechanisms that will permit sharing among communities across the State so that we can continue to learn from our experiences and strengthen the effectiveness of our work and make New York the Healthiest State.
1 The American Health Rankings identified New York State as 18th in its most recent annual comprehensive assessment of the nation's health on assessment of the nation's health on a state-by-state basis.
2Frieden, TR. A Framework for Public Health Action: The Health Impact Pyramid. American Journal of Public Health April 2010;100(4); 590-595