Strategic plan presentation 11.16.11

1,927 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,927
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
340
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The purpose of this presentation is to share with you all the highlights from the new DRAFT tobacco control strategic plan. The purpose of this plan is to provide focus and guidance to the TRC, direct the state health department’s projects, activities, and grants and to inform the efforts of Colorado agencies, coalitions, organizations working in tobacco prevention and control.
  • These are the topics I’ll be covering today.
  • As you listen/watch this presentation today, please be considering the following questions. This isn’t the time for wordsmithing or going in to too many details. Following today’s presentation, the tobacco staff will be scheduling several webinars to gather broad stakeholder feedback.
  • Background – in 2009, it was decided that it’s time to redo the 2007 plan. In August of 2009, the plan was drafted and a process was in place to roll it out and gather feedback. As you all know, the fiscal emergency in the state started at about this time and the roll out plan was put on hold until now.
  • Process: The group reviewed and analyzed the tobacco disparities strategic plan from 2006, updated tobacco data and information, Current and projected socioeconomic political issues and trends, national and state public health issues and operating environment, tobacco industry trends and projections and tobacco regulatory environment.New focus on specific outcomes – the original intent was to guide RC priorities for the 2010-2013 grants. Most robust dataPublic health trends – policy, SB 194, what was happening nationally
  • Intentionally designed to provide strategic, focused, and clear direction and guidance for the RC and CDPHE’s tobacco program. Its intent is to be a tool to set priorities and to guide decisions and actions for the greatest impact. The planning group used these parameters in developing the plan. Focused on goals and strategies that have the most dramatic difference toward impact. Deliberately does not reflect all the strategies being used in tobacco prevention and control.Designed to achieve well-defined outcomes for statewide impact. Plan is not prescriptive, does not define annual tasks and activities toward the goals. Activity level is to be designed and implemented by CDPHE and RC grantees. Long-term, strategic commentsBased on best available data and EB strategiesExplicit priority to reduce and eliminate the health gap in disparate populations – fully incorporated in all goals.
  • Guiding principle – Quote of ALEnsure quitters maintain long-term abstinence – turn more quit attempts into cessation successes.
  • Describe the essence of this. An important framework is the Health Equity model. It suggests a more comprehensive systems approach in support of community and health systems change. When we get to the goals, we will talk about opportunities to use this model to achieve our goals.
  • 2008 TABSBRFSS confirms this – 2009 and 2010 (the low ses)STW - Why “STW” is in quotes – not an accurate description – will solicit stakeholder feedback on the appropriate term for this group. Young adults who do not attend college have a smoking prevalence twice that of the young adult student population, and no evidence of decreased initiation in recent survey years. Additionally, this group of young people has a stronger preference for mentholated cigarettes and tries to quit less often than their counterparts. Also women of childbearing age. High percentage of medicaid births are to this population who tend to have children yougner.
  • Move the notes from this to the other. Other bullets on LSES – Tobacco advertising is more prominent in low SES communitiesAmericans below the poverty line are 40% more likely to smoke than those at or above the poverty line. 60% of Colorado’s smoking population are LSES.
  • The plan follows this model – Have to have a vision and mission to know where we’re going. Goals in this case are very specific based on the current state of tobacco control in Colorado. Given the conditions, the strategies are the ways that we can achieve our goals. The activities were not formulated by the subcommittee, these are to be determined by the RFA, CDPHE staff and informed by stakeholder feedback.
  • Impact – the impact or difference we are trying to makeVision – The vision or what we will see as a result of our workMission – the mission of state tobacco prevention and control efforts is to:
  • Give context/snapshot The strategic goals have a 10 year time frame to coincide with HP 2020. Goals are the specific endpoints, or outcomes to be achieved. Cessation-success gap decreased by 50% for LSES smokers – Among low SES Smokers, only 5% who try to quit stay quit at 3 monthsThey attempt to quit at a similar rate, success rate is where the disparity is. 29% is prevalence of smoking among LSESTobacco use is treated as a chronic disease – Would be treated as a chronic disease by medical establishment and insurance companies and health careChronic disease self managementSeen as an addictionNeed to recognize it as a disease so that treatment modalities are thought about as differentLegislature see QL reports, quit = done. Takes 7-9 times, always chance of relapse, something they’ll be dealing with their entire lives. Major constraints to industry in time, place and manner as a result of new co laws and FDA –One aspect of the FSPTCA is that it gave states new authority to regulate the time, place and manner of tobacco products. Where products are sole (zoning, location in store, pharmacies, etc.), time of day – some states have put restrictions – no sales between 3pm and 6pm. Product placement, advertising, etc. 6 out of 10 colorado youth find it easy to access tobacco products. Also, marketing and advertising disproportionately affects low SES, and minority communities. Smoking prevalence and initiation among STW – Why “STW” is in quotes – not an accurate description – will solicit stakeholder feedback on the appropriate term for this group. Young adults who do not attend college have a smoking prevalence twice that of the young adult student population, and no evidence of decreased initiation in recent survey years. Additionally, this group of young people has a stronger preference for mentholated cigarettes and tries to quit less often than their counterparts. Also, an opportunity to apply to health equity framework..Initiation among low ses youth is reduced by 50% - We’ve made great strides in reducing youth initiation. Nationwide and in CO, this decline has stalled. Great opportunity to apply the health equity model and tools. How to reduce risk factors overall including tobacco? How to increase those factors that may prevent youth from ever starting? Connection to caring adult, school connectedness, etc. Colorado is in top 10 for highest prices – As you learned in last month’s presentation, CO is now ranked 34th at 84 cents per pack. Opportunities to look at this in different ways – minimum price, banning buy one get one’s and other industry schemes that counteract the tax and essentially reduce the price.
  • None of these listed strategies should look new to members or partners who have been working in tobacco control. These are the strategies that we’ve been employing for some time now. For purposes of this plan, strategies are the pattern of activities that will reap the greatest benefits over time. The strategies serve as an organizing principle to focus activities towards outcomes. Given the goals and the role of public health, the primary strategy is social marketing / community mobilization. In addition, policy / health systems change and advocacy are strategies to achieve goals.  Social marketing and community mobilization is understanding the specific population, and developing strategies to bring about behavior change (decrease initiation or increase cessation). Social marketing refers to a specific area of marketing to bring about behavior change towards a social cause or public benefit. The underlying premise of social marketing is to increase benefits and remove obstacles to behavior at the individual or community level. Community organizing or mobilization will be necessary to ensure appropriate political, cultural, and social approaches and to have maximum impact and influence. Community mobilization will require constancy of purpose and disciplined and consistent action.  Policy and health systems change recognizes that some action requires legislation or regulation at a system-wide level – particularly statewide or industry wide – to create an environment in which change can take place.  The role of public health is to provide the data and to be the credible and legitimate source of information related to tobacco control and chronic disease prevention. Advocacy is “taking a stand” or acting in support of something. It is appropriate for the state to educate and build a constituency that is in support of making tobacco less accessible, through price or other barriers, and to be vocal advocates in support of funding for tobacco prevention and control efforts.
  • We know what to do in traditional tobacco control, this is toing to take some time. Time to make the switchPopulation based to focusedIf it was easy or accomplished with interventions over the last several years, we wouldhave see some changes for these populations
  • As you listen/watch this presentation today, please be considering the following questions. This isn’t the time for wordsmithing or going in to too many details. Following today’s presentation, the tobacco staff will be scheduling several webinars to gather broad stakeholder feedback.
  • Strategic plan presentation 11.16.11

    1. 1. November Tobacco Review Committee Meeting
    2. 2.  Introduction Overview Context Priority Populations Impact and Outcomes Implications Implementation and Evaluation Conclusion
    3. 3.  Is this plan going in the right direction? What feedback/input do you have on the goals? Are the goals in line with where this committee is heading? What information do we need to gather from stakeholders and the rest of the tobacco control community?
    4. 4.  Background ◦ Legislatively mandated ◦ Currently operating under 2007 plan Purpose of new plan ◦ Provide focus and guidance for RC grant prioritization ◦ Direct projects, activities, and grants towards specific outcomes ◦ Inform agencies, coalitions and organizations
    5. 5.  Planning Group ◦ Designated by the Review Committee ◦ Originally: Erin Bertoli, Arnold Levinson, Lorenzo Olivas, Jennifer Ludwig, Jason Vahling, Karen DeLeeuw, Bob Doyle, Nita Mosby Henry Process ◦ Builds on 2007 plan Context ◦ 2008 Colorado Tobacco Data ◦ State Situation ◦ Public Health Trends ◦ Industry Update and Regulatory Environment
    6. 6.  Focused, rather than comprehensive Outcomes 10-year strategic framework Does not include task and activity level detail Data and evidence-based Attention to health and tobacco use disparities
    7. 7.  Strategic Focus ◦ “Given the data, evidence, and operating context, what must the Review Committee focus on in order to have the greatest impact to eliminate tobacco related disease and death?” Imperatives ◦ Ensure quitters maintain long-term abstinence ◦ Decrease initiation and prevalence among all populations, particularly of those disparately affected by tobacco use ◦ Influence the sale of tobacco
    8. 8. Health Equity NATIONAL INFLUENCES GOVERNMENT POLICIES U.S. CULTURE & CULTURAL NORMS + = ACCESS , HEALTH PREGNANCY ECONOMIC PHYSICAL SOCIAL MENTAL UTILIZATION BEHAVIORS & HEALTH & QUALITY QUALITY OF LIFE OPPORTUNITY ENVIRONMENT FACTORS CONDITIONS CARE EARLY • Nutrition • Mental health • Health MORBIDITY CHILDHOOD • Income Built • Participation • Employment Environment • Social • Physical status insurance • Education •Recreation support activity • Stress coverage MORTALITY •Food • Tobacco use • Substance • Received CHILDHOOD • Housing • Leadership •Transportation • Skin Cancer abuse needed care • Political LIFE EXPECTANCY • Injury • Functional • Provider influence Environmental status availability • Organization • Oral healthADOLESCENCE quality • Preventive al networks • Sexual health •Housing care • Violence •Water • Discrimination •Air • Obesity ADULTHOOD • Cholesterol Safety • High Blood PressureOLDER ADULTSPublic Health’s Role in Addressing the Social Determinants of Health•Advocating for and defining public policy to achieve health equity•Data collection, monitoring and surveillance•Coordinated interagency efforts •Population based interventions to address health factors•Creating organizational environments that enable change •Community engagement and capacity building Colorado Department of Public Health - Social Determinants of Health
    9. 9.  Plan Focus ◦ The state’s low SES population, which is inclusive of more than 60% of the smoking population, and cuts across racial and ethnic disparate groups ◦ The 18 to 24 (“straight to work”) population to break a pattern of tobacco use prior to the onset of related diseases ◦ Continued attention to youth – particularly those most at risk (Low SES) to continue decline in prevalence among that population
    10. 10. “Thanks to the tobacco industry’s targeted marketing efforts, lower-income and less- educated populations are particularly burdened by tobacco use. Low-income people smoke more, suffer more, spend more, and die more from tobacco use. The tobacco industry has gone to great lengths to target lower income and racial and ethnic groups.”
    11. 11.  Disparate Populations ◦ African Americans, American Indians, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, LGBTIQ, Latinos and Hispanics, People with low socioeconomic status, People with disabilities, People with mental illnesses, People with substance abuse disorders and, Spit tobacco users ◦ The greatest single predictor of tobacco use is Low SES Young Adults and “Straight to Work” ◦ Highest prevalence of smokers Youth, Particularly At-risk
    12. 12. Vision and Mission Goals Outcomes to achieve Strategies Best way to achieve outcomes given conditions Objectives Purpose of strategy-what we are trying to achieve ActivitiesTasks to meet objectives given the strategy to achieve the goal
    13. 13.  Impact ◦ Eliminate tobacco related disease and death for all populations in Colorado Vision ◦ A healthy Colorado free of the burdens of tobacco Mission ◦ Prevent premature death related to tobacco
    14. 14. • The cessation-success gap affecting low SES smokers is decreased by 50%• Tobacco use is treated as a chronic disease in Colorado• There are major constraints to the tobacco industry in time, place and manner as a result of Colorado statute and FDA regulations• Smoking prevalence and initiation among “straight- to-work” young adults is decreased by 50%• Initiation among low SES youth is reduced by 50%• Colorado is in the top 10 among states with the highest price for tobacco products
    15. 15.  Social marketing & community mobilization Health systems and policy change Policy Advocacy
    16. 16.  Systems and Process Alignment ◦ Realign priorities, funding, and activities to facilitate the accomplishment of strategic goals ◦ Alignment with other A35 committees ◦ State Chronic Disease Plan Next Steps ◦ Stakeholder feedback ◦ Incorporate feedback ◦ Plan finalization ◦ Funding alignment with plan
    17. 17.  Is this plan going in the right direction? What feedback/input do you have on the goals? Are the goals in line with where this committee is heading? What information do we need to gather from stakeholders and the rest of the tobacco control community?

    ×