A Proactive, Systematic Approach to Building the Capacity of Technical Assistance Providers.

Technical assistance (TA) is a major capacity building strategy used by the government sector to promote health outcomes in the United States. However, there is minimal literature about how to develop TA provider capacities. This article describes a systematic and proactive approach for developing TA provider capacity, referred to as Technical Assistance for Technical Assistance Providers (TAFTAP), which draws on three implementation science frameworks (Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation, Getting To Outcomes, and R = MC2). We present an application of TAFTAP within a federal agency providing a readiness-informed TA approach to health departments of states, territories, and tribal areas implementing comprehensive tobacco prevention control programs. Pilot data suggest that TAFTAP is a promising approach for improving the quality of TA delivery. At the end of the 2-year project period, TAFTAP recipients provided generally positive qualitative feedback about the support they received. They chose to sustain the readiness-informed TA by incorporating it into a future funding announcement. Downstream state-level TA grantee recipients reported positive outcomes (e.g., accelerated progress, enjoying more one-on-one time with TA providers) from receiving the TA innovation from TAFTAP recipients. We suggest that funding agencies and training and TA centers consider this approach to bolster the capacity and motivation of TA providers for downstream benefit to health and human services staff and their clients. Practical steps for employing TAFTAP to advance health outcomes are included in this article.

From Practice to Publication: The Promise of Writing Workshops.

Practitioners in health departments, university extension programs, and nonprofit organizations working in public health face varied challenges to publishing in the peer-reviewed literature. These practitioners may lack time, support, skills, and efficacy needed for manuscript submission, which keeps them from sharing their wisdom and experience-based evidence. This exclusion can contribute to literature gaps, a failure of evidence-based practice to inform future research, reduced ability to educate partners, and delays in advancing public health practice. Our article describes the writing workshops offered to Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity (DNPAO), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded programs in 2021. This project consisted of three 60-minute introductory writing webinars open to all recipients, followed by a Writing for Publications workshop, an 8- to 9-week virtual learning/writing intensive for selected writing team applicants. The Society for Public Health Education staff, consultants, and CDC/DNPAO staff developed, refined, and presented the curriculum. The workshop for public health practitioner writing teams was offered to two cohorts and included extensive coaching and focused on potential submission to a Health Promotion Practice supplement, "Reducing Chronic Disease through Physical Activity and Nutrition: Public Health Practice in the Field" (see Supplemental Material), which was supported by CDC/DNPAO. We describe the webinars, the workshop design, modifications, evaluation methods and results.

Indicators for chronic disease surveillance - United States, 2013.

Chronic diseases are an important public health problem, which can result in morbidity, mortality, disability, and decreased quality of life. Chronic diseases represented seven of the top 10 causes of death in the United States in 2010 (Murphy SL, Xu J, Kochanek KD. Deaths: final data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2013;6. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf Adobe PDF file). Chronic diseases and risk factors vary by geographic area such as state and county, where essential public health interventions are implemented. The chronic disease indicators (CDIs) were established in the late 1990s through collaboration among CDC, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and the Association of State and Territorial Chronic Disease Program Directors (now the National Association of Chronic Disease Directors) to enable public health professionals and policymakers to retrieve data for chronic diseases and risk factors that have a substantial impact on public health. This report describes the latest revisions to the CDIs, which were developed on the basis of a comprehensive review during 2011-2013. The number of indicators is increasing from 97 to 124, with major additions in systems and environmental indicators and additional emphasis on high-impact diseases and conditions as well as emerging topics.

Using public health and community partnerships to reduce density of alcohol outlets.

Excessive alcohol use causes approximately 80,000 deaths in the United States each year. The Guide to Community Preventive Services recommends reducing the density of alcohol outlets - the number of physical locations in which alcoholic beverages are available for purchase either per area or per population - through the use of regulatory authority as an effective strategy for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms. We briefly review the research on density of alcohol outlets and public health and describe the powers localities have to influence alcohol outlet density. We summarize Regulating Alcohol Outlet Density: An Action Guide, which describes steps that local communities can take to reduce outlet density and the key competencies and resources of state and local health departments. These include expertise in public health surveillance and evaluation methods, identification and tracking of outcome measures, geographic information systems (GIS) mapping, community planning and development of multisector efforts, and education of community leaders and policy makers. We illustrate the potential for partnerships between public health agencies and local communities by presenting a contemporary case study from Omaha, Nebraska. Public health agencies have a vital and necessary role to play in efforts to reduce alcohol outlet density. They are often unaware of the potential of this strategy and have strong potential partners in the thousands of community coalitions nationwide that are focused on reducing alcohol-related problems.

Engaging partners to initiate evaluation efforts: tactics used and lessons learned from the prevention research centers program.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Prevention Research Centers (PRC) Program underwent a 2-year evaluation planning project using a participatory process that allowed perspectives from the national community of PRC partners to be expressed and reflected in a national logic model. CONTEXT: The PRC Program recognized the challenge in developing a feasible, useable, and relevant evaluation process for a large, diverse program. To address the challenge, participatory and utilization-focused evaluation models were used. METHODS: Four tactics guided the evaluation planning process: 1) assessing stakeholders' communication needs and existing communication mechanisms and infrastructure; 2) using existing mechanisms and establishing others as needed to inform, educate, and request feedback; 3) listening to and using feedback received; and 4) obtaining adequate resources and building flexibility into the project plan to support multifaceted mechanisms for data collection. CONSEQUENCES: Participatory methods resulted in buy-in from stakeholders and the development of a national logic model. Benefits included CDC's use of the logic model for program planning and development of a national evaluation protocol and increased expectations among PRC partners for involvement. Challenges included the time, effort, and investment of program resources required for the participatory approach and the identification of whom to engage and when to engage them for feedback on project decisions. INTERPRETATION: By using a participatory and utilization-focused model, program partners positively influenced how CDC developed an evaluation plan. The tactics we used can guide the involvement of program stakeholders and help with decisions on appropriate methods and approaches for engaging partners.

Using concept mapping to develop a logic model for the Prevention Research Centers Program.

INTRODUCTION: Concept mapping is a structured conceptualization process that provides a visual representation of relationships among ideas. Concept mapping was used to develop a logic model for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Prevention Research Centers Program, which has a large and diverse group of stakeholders throughout the United States. No published studies have used concept mapping to develop a logic model for a national program. METHODS: Two logic models were constructed using the data from the concept mapping process and program documents: one for the national level and one for the local level. Concept mapping involved three phases: 1) developing questions to generate ideas about the program's purpose and function, 2) gathering input from 145 national stakeholders and 135 local stakeholders and sorting ideas into themes, and 3) using multivariate statistical analyses to generate concept maps. Logic models were refined using feedback received from stakeholders at regional meetings and conferences and from a structured feedback tool. RESULTS: The national concept map consisted of 9 clusters with 88 statements; the local concept map consisted of 11 clusters with 75 statements. Clusters were categorized into three logic model components: inputs, activities, and outcomes. Based on feedback, two draft logic models were combined and finalized into one for the Prevention Research Centers Program. CONCLUSION: Concept mapping provides a valuable data source, establishes a common view of a program, and identifies inputs, activities, and outcomes in a logic model. Our concept mapping process resulted in a logic model that is meaningful for stakeholders, incorporates input from the program's partners, and establishes important program expectations. Our methods may be beneficial for other programs that are developing logic models for evaluation planning.

The cancer prevention and control research network.

The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network is a national network recently established to focus on developing new interventions and disseminating and translating proven interventions into practice to reduce cancer burden and disparities, especially among minority and medically underserved populations. Jointly funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute, the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network consists of sites administered through Prevention Research Centers funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The five sites are located in Kentucky, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Texas, Washington State, and West Virginia. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network's intervention areas include primary prevention of cancer through healthy eating, physical activity, sun avoidance, tobacco control, and early detection of cancer through screening. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network uses the methods of community-based participatory research and seeks to build on the cancer-relevant systematic reviews of the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Initial foci for the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network's research work groups include projects to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers; to promote informed decision making for prostate cancer screening; and to validate educational materials developed for low-literacy populations.

Translating research into improved outcomes in comprehensive cancer control.

A key question in moving comprehensive cancer control (CCC) plans into action is, to what extent should the knowledge gained from investments in cancer prevention and control research influence the actions taken by states, tribes, and territories during implementation? Underlying this 'should' is the assumption that evidence-based approaches (i.e., a public health or clinical intervention or policy that has resulted in improved outcomes when scientifically tested), when implemented in a real-world setting, will increase the likelihood of improved outcomes. This article elucidates the barriers and opportunities for integrating science with practice across the cancer control continuum. However, given the scope of CCC and the substantial investment in generating new knowledge through science, it is difficult for any one agency, on its own, to make a sufficient investment to ensure new knowledge is translated and implemented at a national, state, or local level. Thus, if greater demand for evidence-based interventions and increased resources for adopting them are going to support the dissemination initiatives described herein, new interagency partnerships must be developed to ensure that sufficient means are dedicated to integrating science with service. Furthermore, for these collaborations to increase both in size and in frequency, agency leaders must clearly articulate their support for these collaborative initiatives and explicitly recognize those collaborative efforts that are successful. In this way, the whole (in this context, comprehensive cancer control) can become greater than the sum of its parts.