Phase I Leadership Institutes

Dates and Locations

Note: In most cases, Institute groupings are based on American Cancer Society Division boundaries.

• June 25–27, 2002
  Midwest Division: South Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin
  Great Lakes Division: Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois
  Other: Ohio and Idaho



• May 1–3, 2002
  New England Division: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine



• December 4–6, 2001
  Hi-Tex Division: Hawaii and Texas
  Northwest Division: Washington, Oregon, and Montana
  Other: California and Alaska



• October 1–3, 2001
  East Division: New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania
  Southeast Division: Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina
  Other: Iowa



• June 2001
  Rocky Mountain Division: North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah
  Southwest Division: Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico



• April 2001
  Mid Atlantic Division: West Virginia, Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. Other: Florida



• September 2000
  Mid-South Division: Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee



• August 2000
  Heartland Division: Nebraska, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Kansas

Topics and Objectives

The 2½-day Institutes covered the following topics:

• A conceptual overview of comprehensive cancer control.
• Operationalizing comprehensive cancer control.
• The sharing of best practices in comprehensive cancer control.
• Using state data.
• Review of cancer burden and evidence-based intervention.
• Mobilizing support and building partnerships.
• Challenges to team building.
• Creating an action agenda.
• Communication with other potential partners.
• Follow-up activities and technical support.

Their objectives were to:

• Enhance participants' understanding of and commitment to comprehensive cancer control.
• Enhance participants' understanding of, skills in, and commitment to team leadership.
• Help participants develop strategies for moving the comprehensive cancer control concept forward in their states.

Participants should be able to:

• Build on the strengths of their categorical programs to develop new and expanded capacities for disease prevention and control.
• Decrease duplication of effort among categorical programs.
• Respond to increasing public interest in holistic care.
• Create new program opportunities across the complete spectrum of cancer prevention and control interventions.
• Create a combined vision that allows state leaders to see cancer control gaps in their state.

Desired outcome: Participants took significant new action to initiate or enhance comprehensive cancer control activities in their state within 6 months of completing the Institute.

Participants

Participants in the Institutes were state leaders in cancer control who could commit resources and make decisions on behalf of their organization. These organizational leaders were invited to participate on a state team of 5 to 10 members. State teams were composed of leaders in cancer control from organizations such as the American Cancer Society, state department of health, state cancer registry, American College of Surgeons Physician Liaison Program, academic cancer centers, and minority health organizations. The sponsoring organizations provided meeting and travel support for as many as 10 representatives from each state. (Additional representatives were required to cover travel and lodging costs.)