On this page:
Part
I: Overview of Maternal and Child Health Bureau – Mission Statement,
History and Focus, MCH Partners, and Organizational Structure.
Part
II: The Plan – Goals, Key Strategies, Performance Measures and
Annual Priorities.
Part
III: Conceptual Framework for the Plan – The MCHB Vision, MCHB
Guiding Principles, MCH Health Services Pyramid, and Key Documents/Linkages.
Part
IV: The Planning Cycle – Needs Assessment; Development of Goals,
Key Strategies and Annual Priorities; Program and Resource Allocation;
and Performance Measures and Evaluation.
Part I: OVERVIEW
OF MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH BUREAU
Mission Statement
The mission
of the Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) is to provide national
leadership, in partnership with key stakeholders, to improve the physical
and mental health, safety and well-being of the maternal and child health
(MCH) population which includes all of the nation’s women, infants,
children, adolescents, and their families, including fathers and children
with special health care needs.
MCHB History and Focus
With roots going back
nearly a century, the Federal Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB)
of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department
of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has the primary responsibility for
promoting and improving the health of our nation’s women, children
and families. This Federal commitment to addressing maternal and child
health (MCH) can be traced first to the Children’s Bureau (established
in 1912) and then to Title V of the Social Security Act (enacted in 1935),
which focuses on maternal and child health services. Today, MCHB administers
a broad range of programs that address the needs of the nation’s
MCH population
[1] , the largest of which is Title V, the Maternal and Child Health
Services Block Grant, which includes State Formula Block Grants, Special
Projects of Regional and National Significance (SPRANS) grants and Community
Integrated Service Systems (CISS) grants.
Working with a wide
range of public and private sector partners, MCHB provides both a framework
and a focal point for MCH efforts at the national, State and local levels.
Through the MCH Block Grant, the Bureau provides funds to every State
and territory to support a statewide MCH program, including a program
for children with special health care needs (CSHCN)
[2] . The Bureau promotes and supports the development of family-centered,
culturally/linguistically competent, community-based systems of care nationwide
for CSHCN, and the entire MCH population. MCHB resources and programs
are often directed to meet the particular developmental or societal needs
of one or more of the target MCH population groups. In addition, MCHB
funds are used to train MCH professionals; conduct research to improve
MCH status and services; develop standards for MCH services; and build
MCH/public health capacity for assessment, planning and quality assurance.
Finally, MCHB funds are used to develop and support systems and programs
that address specific health and safety issues such as: abstinence education,
bioterrorism, emergency medical services for children, genetics, infant
mortality, injury prevention, nutrition, oral health, poison control,
traumatic brain injury, universal newborn screening and women’s
health.
MCH Partners
The Maternal and Child
Health Bureau works with a wide range of public and private sector partners,
including States, communities, professional associations, academic institutions,
the research community, faith-based organizations, other organizations
and agencies, providers and families. Bureau grantees are included among
its MCH partners.
Organizational Structure
The MCHB is directed
by the HRSA Associate Administrator for Maternal and Child Health. In
addition to the Office of the Associate Administrator, the Bureau includes
the following offices and divisions [3] :
Office
of Operations Management
Office of Program
Development
Office of Data
and Information Management
HRSA Office
of Women’s Health
HRSA Office
of Adolescent Health
Division of
Perinatal Systems and Women’s Health |
Division
of Child, Adolescent and Family Health
Division of
Services for Children with Special Health Care Needs
Division of
Research, Training and Education
Division of
State and Community Health |
Part II: THE PLAN
– GOALS, KEY STRATEGIES, PERFORMANCE
MEASURES AND ANNUAL
PRIORITIES
Goals for FY 2003 - 2007
In order to fulfill
its mission, the Bureau has set the following five broad goals for FY
2003 - 2007:
Goal 1: Provide
National Leadership for Maternal and Child Health
Goal 2: Promote an Environment that Supports Maternal and Child Health
Goal 3: Eliminate Health Barriers and Disparities
Goal 4: Improve the Health Infrastructure and Systems of Care
Goal 5: Assure Quality of Care
Key Strategies: FY
2003 - 2007
The MCHB key strategies
are the broad, cross-cutting approaches the Bureau uses in order to reach
its five-year goals. Key strategies for FY 2003 - 2007 are listed below
by goal:
Goal
1 – Provide National Leadership for Maternal and Child Health |
Key
Strategies
- Create a
shared vision and goals for MCH.
- Strengthen
the MCH knowledge base and support scholarship within the MCH
community.
- Forge strong,
collaborative, sustainable MCH partnerships both within and beyond
the health sector.
- Promote
family leadership in MCH service delivery, evaluation and program/policy
development.
- Provide
both graduate level and continuing education training to assure
interdisciplinary MCH public health leadership nationwide.
|
Goal
2 – Promote an Environment that Supports Maternal and Child
Health |
Key Strategies
- Using the
best available evidence, develop and promote guidelines and practices
to assure social, emotional and physical environment that supports
the health and well-being of the MCH population.
- Work with
States and communities to plan and implement policies and programs
to improve the social, emotional and physical environment.
|
Goal
3 – Eliminate Health Barriers and Disparities |
Key
Strategies
- Develop and
promote health services and systems of care designed to eliminate
disparities and barriers across the MCH population.
- Train an
MCH workforce that is culturally competent and reflects an increasingly
diverse population.
|
Goal
4 – Improve the Health Infrastructure and Systems of Care |
Key
Strategies
- Build analytic
capacity for assessment, planning, and evaluation.
- Using the
best available evidence, develop and promote guidelines and practices
that improve services and systems of care.
- Assist States
and communities to plan and develop comprehensive, integrated
health service systems.
- Work with
States and communities to assure that services and systems of
care reach targeted populations.
- Work with
States and communities to address selected issues within targeted
populations.
|
Goal
5 – Assure Quality of Care |
Key
Strategies
- Build analytic
capacity to assess and assure quality of care.
- Develop
and promote health services and systems designed to improve quality
of care.
- Develop
and promote health services and systems that assure appropriate
follow-up services.
|
Performance
Measures: FY 2003 - 2007
In keeping
with its commitment to accountability and in accordance with the Government
Performance Results Act (GPRA), the Bureau has developed performance
measures as one means of tracking progress in meeting its five-year goals.
These are not the only measures of the Bureau’s success in designing
and implementing effective strategies to improve maternal and child health;
however, they do represent an important component of the Bureau’s
overall self-evaluation. See below for the MCHB performance measures
for FY 2003 - 2007, listed with related goals, strategies, and targets
through FY 2007.[4]
MCHB
PERFORMANCE MEASURES: FY 2003 – 2007
Goal
1: Provide National Leadership for Maternal and Child Health |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
A.
Create a shared vision and goals for MCH.
B. Strengthen
the MCH knowledge base and support scholarship within the MCH
community.
C. Forge
strong, collaborative, sustainable MCH partnerships both within
and beyond the health sector.
D. Promote
family leadership in MCH service delivery, evaluation and program/policy
development.
E. Provide
both graduate level and continuing education training to assure
interdisciplinary MCH public health leadership nationwide. |
- The percent
of MCHB supported programs that are satisfied with the leadership
of and services received from MCHB. 2002 Baseline: 73%.
2007 Target: 80%.
- The percent
of MCHB customers (clients) of MCHB programs that are satisfied
with services received from MCHB supported projects. 2007
Target: 80%.*
- The percent
of completed MCHB supported projects publishing findings in
peer-reviewed journals. 2007 Target: 5%.*
- The number
of publications, including peer-reviewed manuscripts, authored
or co-authored by MCHB staff. 2002 Baseline: 4. 2007 Target:
8 per year.
- The percent
of MCHB supported projects that are sustained in the community
after the federal grant project period is completed. 2007
Target: 50%.*
- The degree
to which MCHB supported programs ensure family participation
in program and policy activities. 2007 Target: Average score
of 12 out of 18 total.*
- The degree
to which the State ensures family participation in program and
policy activities in the State CSHCN program. 2001 Baseline:
Average score of 12.6 out of 18 total. 2007 Target:
Average score of 15 out of 18 total.
- The percent
of graduates of MCHB long-term training programs that demonstrate
field leadership after graduation. 2007 Target: 70%.*
|
*New
Indicator, no baseline
Goal
2: Promote an Environment that Supports Maternal and Child Health. |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
A.
Using the best available evidence, develop and promote guidelines
and practices to assure social, emotional and physical environment
that supports the health and well-being of the MCH population.
B. Work
with States and communities to plan and implement policies and
programs to improve the social, emotional and physical environment. |
- The rate
of deaths to children aged 14 years and younger caused by motor
vehicle crashes per 100,000 children. 2001 Baseline: 3.87/100,000.
2007 Target: 3.0/100,000.
- The rate
(per 100,000) of suicide deaths among youths aged 15 through
19. 2000 Baseline: 8.15/100,000 2007: Target: 7.7/100,000.
- The degree
to which States promote and protect the health and safety of
children age 1 through 6 in child care settings. 2007 Target:
Average score of 10 out of 15 total.*
- The degree
to which States have implemented injury and violence prevention
activities. 2007 Target: Average score of 25 out of 36 total.*
|
*New
Indicator, no baseline
Goal
3: Eliminate Health Barriers and Disparities |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
A.
Develop and promote health services and systems of care designed
to eliminate disparities and barriers across the MCH population.
B. Train
an MCH workforce that is culturally competent and reflects an
increasingly diverse population. |
- The degree
to which MCHB supported programs have incorporated cultural
competence elements into their policies, guidelines, contracts
and training. 2007 Target: Average score of 55 out of 69
total.*
- The percent
of children under age 21 enrolled in Medicaid for at least 6
months continuously during the year who receive any preventive
or treatment dental service. 2000 Baseline: 30%. 2007 Target:
50%.
- The degree
to which the State Children with Special Health Care Needs (CSHCN)
Program provides or pays for specialty and sub-specialty services,
including care coordination, not otherwise accessible or affordable
to its clients. 2001 Baseline: Average score 8.19 out of
23 total. 2007 Target: Average score of 12 out of 23 total.
- Percent
of Children with Special Health Care Needs (CSHCN) in the State
CSHCN program with a source of insurance for primary and specialty
care. 2001 Baseline: 88.2%. 2007 Target: 90%.
- Percent
of children without health insurance. 2001 Baseline: 13.06%.
2007 Target: 10%.
- Percent
of potentially Medicaid-eligible children who have received
a service paid by the Medicaid Program. 2001 Baseline: 77.34%.
2007 Target: 85%.
- The degree
to which grantees assist families of children with special health
needs to partner in decision making and be satisfied with services
they receive. 2007 Target: Average score of 100 out
of 125 total.*
- The degree
to which MCHB long-term training grantees include cultural competency
in their curricula/training. 2007 Target: Average score of
21 out of 27 total.*
- The percent
of participants in MCHB long-term training programs who are
from under-represented groups. 2007 Target: 20%. *
|
*New
Indicator, no baseline
Goal 4:
Improve the Health Infrastructure and Systems of Care |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
A.
Build analytic capacity for assessment, planning, and evaluation.
B. Using
the best available evidence, develop and promote guidelines and
practices that improve services and systems of care.
C. Assist
States and communities to plan and develop comprehensive, integrated
health service systems. |
- The degree
to which States electronically link vital statistics data sets,
Medicaid, and other health information systems data sets. 2007
Target: Average score of 19 out of 32 total.*
- The degree
to which grantees electronically link vital statistics data
sets, Medicaid, and other health information systems data sets.
2007 Target: Average score of 58 out of 72 total.*
- The degree
to which MCHB supported programs facilitate health providers’
screening of women participants for risk factors. 2007 Target:
Average score of 47 out of 72 total.*
- The percent
of States with pediatric guidelines for acute care facilities
to provide emergency and critical care. 2001 Baseline: 73%.
2007 Target: 80%.
- The degree
to which a State system for nutrition services has been established
for MCH populations. 2007 Target: Average score of 19 out
of 24 total.*
- The number
of States that include in their oral health plans at least 5
of the 10 essential elements of the guidelines included in ASTDD’s
“Building Infrastructure & Capacity in State and Territorial
Oral Health Programs.” 2000 Baseline: 20 State and
Territories. 2007 Target: 37 States and Territories.
- The degree
to which States and Communities have implemented comprehensive
systems for women’s health services. 2007 Target: Average
score of 22 out of 28 total.*
- The degree
to which grantees have assisted States in organizing community-based
service systems so that families of children with special health
care needs can use them easily. 2007 Target: Average score
of 9 out of 21 total.*
- The degree
to which States have developed a comprehensive adolescent health
strategic planning process. 2007 Target: Average score of
50 out of a combined total score of 63.*
- The degree
to which State agencies work collaboratively to develop a Plan
for building early childhood service systems. 2007 Target:
Average score of 19 out of 24 total.*
|
*New
Indicator, no baseline
Goal
4: Improve the Health Infrastructure and Systems of Care |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
D.
Work with States and communities to assure that services and systems
of care reach targeted populations.
E. Work
with States and communities to address selected issues within
targeted populations |
- The percent
of pregnant participants of MCHB supported programs who have
a prenatal care visit in the first trimester of pregnancy. 2007
Target: 80%.
- The degree
to which grantees have assisted States in increasing the percentage
of youth with special health care needs who have received services
necessary to make transitions to all aspects of adult life,
including adult health care, work and independence. 2007
Target: Average score of 7 out of 9 total.*
- The percent
of State SSI beneficiaries less than 16 years old receiving
rehabilitative services from the State Children with Special
Health Care Needs (CSHCN) Program. 2001 Baseline: 24.68%.
2007 Target: 50%.
- Percent
of newborns in the State with at least one screening for each
of the following: PKU, hypothyroidism, galactosemia, hemoglobinopathies
[(e.g. the sickle cell diseases) (combined)] 2001 Baseline:
99.27%. 2007 Target: 99.5%.
- Percent
of children through age 2 who have completed immunizations for
Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Polio, Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis,
Haemophilus Influenza, Hepatitis B. 2001 Baseline: 76.84%
. 2007 Target: 85%.
- Percent
of third grade children who have received protective sealants
on at least one permanent molar tooth. 2001 Baseline: 25.12%.
2007 Target: 35%.
- Percentage
of mothers who breastfeed their infants at hospital discharge.
2001 Baseline: 59.32%. 2007 Target: 75%.
- Percentage
of newborns who have been screened for hearing impairment before
hospital discharge. 2001 Baseline: 63.54%. 2007 Target:
80%.
- Percent
of very low birth weight infants delivered at facilities for
high-risk deliveries and neonates. 2001 Baseline: 73.83%.
2007 Target: 85%.
- Percent
of infants born to pregnant women receiving prenatal care beginning
in the first trimester. 2001 Baseline: 81.34%. 2007 Target:
85%.
- The rate
of birth (per 1,000) for teenagers aged 15 through 17 years.
2001 Baseline: 27.28/100,000. 2007 Target: 25/1,000
- Percent
of very low birth weight live births. 2001 Baseline: 1.46%.
2007 Target: 1.35%.
|
*New
Indicator, no baseline
Goal 5:
Assure Quality of Care |
Key
Strategies |
Performance
Measures |
A.
Build analytic capacity to assess and assure quality of care.
B. Develop
and promote health services and systems designed to improve quality
of care.
C. Develop
and promote health services and systems that assure appropriate
follow-up services. |
- The percent
of States that have MCH staff who perform specific epidemiological
activities and other MCH evaluations and analyses. 2002 Baseline:
80%. 2007 Target: 90%.
- The degree
to which States and communities use “morbidity/mortality”
review processes in MCH needs assessment, quality improvement,
and/or data capacity building. 2007 Target: Average score of
3 out of 9 total.*
- The percent
of children with special health care needs age 0 to 18 whose families
have adequate private and/or public insurance to pay for needed
services. 2007 Target: Estimated 80%.
- The degree
to which grantees have assisted States in increasing the percent
of children with special health care needs, age 0 to 18, whose
families have adequate private and/or public insurance to pay
for needed services. 2007 Target: Average score of 14
out of 18 total.*
- The percent
of all children from birth to age 18 participating in MCHB supported
programs who have a medical home. 2007 Target: 80% .*
- The percent
of children with special health care needs age 0 through 18 who
receive coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical
home. 2007 Target: 80%
- The degree
to which grantees have assisted States in increasing the percent
of children with special health care needs age 0 through 18 who
receive coordinated, ongoing, comprehensive care within a medical
home. 2007 Target: Average score of 12 out of 15 total*
- The percent
of women participating in MCHB supported programs who have an
ongoing source of primary and preventive care services for women.
2007 Target: 80%*
- The percent
of Children with Special Health Care Needs (CSHCN) in the State
who have a “medical/health home”. 2001 Baseline:
56.37% 2007 Target: 75%.
- The number
of women participating in MCHB supported programs requiring a
referral, who receive a completed referral. 2007 Target: 80%.
- The degree
to which grantees have assisted States in increasing the percentage
of children who are screened early and continuously for special
health care needs and linked to medical homes, appropriate follow-up,
and early interventions. 2007 Target: Average score of 14
out of 18 total.*
- The percent
of program participants who successfully complete or remain enrolled
in an MCHB supported abstinence-only program. 2007 Target:
80%.*
|
*New Indicator, no
baseline
PART III: CONCEPTUAL
FRAMEWORK FOR THE PLAN
The MCHB Vision
MCHB believes in and
strives to shape a future America in which:
- All children are
wanted, nurtured and provided the assistance they need to mature into
healthy, productive adults.
- Women’s
health, safety and well-being throughout the life cycle are a priority.
- Families and individuals,
young and old alike, are engaged in health promoting activities that
are supported at the community level.
- The right to achieve
one’s full potential is universally assured through attention
to the comprehensive physical, biological, intellectual, emotional and
social needs of the MCH population.
- There is equal
access for all to comprehensive, quality health care provided in a supportive,
culturally competent environment, which is family-centered and community-based.
- All women and
children, especially children with special health care needs, are linked
to a comprehensive, community-based service system through a medical
home.
- Health disparities
by racial, ethnic, geographic area and economic status have been eliminated.
- MCH/public health
agencies exemplify the highest standards of excellence: building systems
of care grounded in the best available knowledge, developing essential
public health capacities and competencies in the service of the MCH
population; employing a highly qualified, diverse workforce; and providing
a respectful and supportive work environment.
- Society recognizes
and fully supports the important role that public health plays in promoting
the health of the MCH population, including building, strengthening
and assuring MCH health services and infrastructure at all levels.
MCHB Guiding Principles
The following principles
guide the work of the Bureau and the development and implementation of
its strategic plan:
Principles for
MCHB Leadership Roles and Responsibilities
- Leadership,
performance and accountability form the basis for the Bureau’s
approach to doing business.
- Effective leadership
requires collaborative partnership as well as excellent communication
among key stakeholders.
- In accordance
with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), and as part
of its national leadership role, the Bureau maintains high expectations
for performance and holds itself, its grantees and other partners
accountable for the use of MCHB resources.
- Evaluation is
an essential tool for program management: evaluations provide the
information needed to assess impact, strengthen programs and make
sound decisions about future allocation of resources.
- Promoting and
maintaining a respectful, supportive work environment is key to successful
performance.
Principles for
the Organization of MCH Systems and Services
- In order to
assure the health of the nation, it is necessary to build and maintain
a public health infrastructure and a highly competent public health
workforce, with the capacity to monitor, assess and address changing
health needs across the population in a timely and effective manner.
- The health,
safety and well-being of the MCH population is best assured when there
is an MCH/family health focus within health systems and services.
- Family and community
participation and engagement are key to the development of effective,
quality health systems and services.
- Women, infants,
children, adolescents and children with special health care needs
each present unique developmental or life cycle needs and opportunities
that must be recognized and addressed by health systems and services.
- Health systems
and services should be sensitive to the unique gender, race, age and
cultural contexts of women, children and their families.
- Health systems
should include a full array of services including, among others, mental,
nutritional and oral health services.
- Health systems
and services should be scientifically-based.
- Health systems
and services should work closely with partners both within and beyond
the health sector, to assure that the broader environment in which
children and families live and develop is supportive and nurturing.
- Health systems
and services can best reach and serve our increasingly diverse MCH
population by providing community-based, culturally competent care
delivered by a highly qualified, interdisciplinary and culturally
diverse workforce that is sensitive to those with special needs.
- Health systems
and services need to address societal and community risk factors in
addition to individual factors affecting health.
MCH Health Services
Pyramid
MCHB uses the construct
of a pyramid to describe the four levels of core public health services
for the MCH population. Starting at the base, these are: (1) infrastructure
building services, (2) population-based services, (3) enabling services,
and (4) direct health care (gap-filling) services. Infrastructure-building
and population-based services provide the broad foundation upon which
enabling and direct care services rest. (See Figure below) The MCH health
services pyramid provides a useful framework for understanding programmatic
directions and resource allocation by the Bureau and its partners as they
work collaboratively to carry out the MCHB mission and accomplish the
MCHB goals.
CORE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
DELIVERED BY MCH AGENCIES
[D]
Key Documents/Linkages
The plan is informed
by and linked to a wide range of documents. Among the key documents that
are essential to the plan’s development are the following:
Healthy People 2010
Objectives
Ten Year Action Plan for CSHCN and their Families
DHHS Strategic Plan
HRSA Strategic Plan
MCHB Division and Office Strategic Plans
State Title V Performance Measures
Draft Performance Measures for MCHB Discretionary Grants
Title V Information System (www.mchdata.net)
MCH Partners’ Strategic Plans
PART IV:
THE PLANNING CYCLE
While MCHB develops
a new Strategic Plan once every five years, the planning cycle is ongoing
and iterative and includes the following components:
Needs Assessment
The Bureau reviews
available data, documents, and program evaluations; identifies national,
State and local MCH issues and concerns; and consults with MCH partners
on a regular basis to assess assets and needs related to the MCH population
and to MCH/public health infrastructure and service systems. In addition,
every five years in preparation for developing a new plan, the Bureau
explicitly solicits feedback on strategic planning directions from its
many MCH partners.
Development of
Goals, Key Strategies and Annual Priorities
Every five years,
the Bureau reviews and revises its broad goals. The new goals are based
on findings from the Bureau’s needs assessments and environmental
scans, and are consistent with the overall direction and goals of HRSA,
and DHHS. The key strategies describe the broad, cross-cutting approaches
by which the Bureau will reach its goals. In order to address emerging
issues and to highlight priority activities and issues for each year,
the Bureau also develops a short list of annual priorities for its work.
Together, the goals, key strategies and annual priorities inform MCHB’s
resource allocation.
Program and Resource
Allocation
Bureau goals, key
strategies and annual priorities are operationalized by MCHB’s divisions
and offices, which work with the Associate Administrator to determine
specific programmatic priorities, allocate resources and oversee implementation
of programs and policies. The Bureau’s policy and program priorities
encompass a wide range of health conditions and issues: some are specific
to an age or population group, while others cut across populations. The
priorities are implemented through the Bureau’s State Block Grants,
discretionary grant programs and special initiatives.
Performance Measurement
and Evaluation
MCHB uses performance
measurement and program evaluation to assess progress in attaining goals,
implementing strategies and addressing priorities. Bureau performance
measures are keyed to the MCHB strategic goals. Each Bureau performance
measure has six major components: five-year objectives, measures to be
used, definition of the measures, relevant Healthy People 2010 objectives
(where applicable), data source and significance. The MCHB performance
measures are a “work in progress” – reflecting various
developmental stages in measurement and availability of data. [5] Bureau evaluation activities focus on specific
programmatic priorities and are guided by an internal Bureau Evaluation
Coordinating Committee. Evaluation is critical to MCHB policy and program
development, program management and funding. Findings from program evaluations
and performance measurement become part of the ongoing needs assessment
activities of the Bureau. Thus, the planning cycle begins again.
APPENDIX A
CURRENT PROGRAMS
ADMINISTERED BY MCHB
Over the years, the
Federal commitment to maternal and child health has broadened to meet
new needs, so that the Maternal and Child Health Bureau now administers
ten major programs funded largely by Congress. In FY2002, these programs
had a total Federal budget of more than $1.1 billion, including
the following:
-
Maternal
and Child Health Services Block Grant – Title V, Social Security
Act (includes SPRANS, CISS and State Formula Grants);
-
Healthy Start Initiative – Section 330H, Public Health Service
Act;
-
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening – Section 399M, Public
Health Service Act;
-
Abstinence Education Program – Section 510, Title V, Social
Security Act;
-
Community-Based
Abstinence Education Program – Section 501(a)(2), Title V,
Social Security Act, and the Appropriations Act for the Departments
of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies;
-
Traumatic Brain Injury – Section 1252, Public Health Service
Act;
-
Emergency
Medical Services for Children Program – Section 1910, Public
Health Service Act;
-
Poison
Control Centers Program – Poison Control Center Enhancement
and Awareness Act;
-
Trauma/Emergency Medical Services – Section 1232, Public
Health Service Act; and
-
Hospital Preparedness (Bioterrorism) – Section 319, Public
Health Service Act.
APPENDIX B
MCHB
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
APPENDIX C
SCHEMATIC OF MCHB
PLANNING CYCLE
[D]
APPENDIX D
SELECTION CRITERIA
FOR MCHB PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The Bureau recognizes
that performance measures have some inherent limitations: (1) they may
often highlight the priorities that best lend themselves to direct measurement;
(2) some are still in the developmental stage, particularly with regard
to complex, community-based interventions; and (3) the full impact of
MCHB efforts can never be captured by a single set of performance measures
and related indicators.
With the above caveats
in mind, the Bureau has used the following criteria in selecting performance
measures:
- The measure
should be relevant to major MCHB priorities, activities, programs
and dollars.
- The measure
should be important and understandable to MCH partners, policy makers
and the public.
- Data for the
measure should generally be available.
- There should
be a logical link between the measure and the desired outcome.
- It should be
reasonable to expect measurable change in the indicator within five
years or less.
- Consideration
should be given to the magnitude of the problem and the feasibility
of improving performance related to the measure.
- Special consideration
should be given to measures that are prevention focused.
[1] See Appendix
A for a listing of current programs administered by MCHB.
[2]
Children with special health care needs are those who have or are at increased
risk for a chronic physical, developmental, behavioral or emotional condition
and who also require health and related services of a type or amount beyond
that required by children generally.
[3]
See Appendix B for MCHB organizational chart.
[4]
For a fully annotated set of performance measures – including objectives,
measures, target, definitions, Healthy People 2010 objective s (where
applicable), data sources and significance – see the MCHB Website:
www.mchb.hrsa.gov.
[5] See Appendix D for a
description of the criteria used in selecting MCHB performance measures.