National Policy Forums
Principal Investigator: Charles Drum, JD, Ph.D.
Oregon Health & Science University
Time Frame: Years 2 - 5
INTRODUCTION
During years 2 - 5, the Center will plan and offer a series of annual National Policy Forums. The purpose of the forum series is to:
-
identify and consider policy issues relevant to the health and wellness of people with disabilities
-
provide a forum for dialogue and collaboration among policy makers, researchers, policy implementers, advocates, and health care organizations on selected issues
- ensure that the RRTC’s work is relevant and useful to these groups.
Anticipated topics include prioritizing policy issues on health and wellness, Wellness Policy Study (RTD 3) findings, Science Conference results and information about best practices to promote health and wellness for people with disabilities.
Objective 1: Publicize Forums
Objective 2: Arrange Logistics of Forums
Objective 3: Conduct Forums
Objective 4: Evaluate Forums
Policy Forum 1
The first Policy Forum took place Friday, May 27, 2001 in Washington, DC. The first forum was designed to be a small group. Ten individuals who work closely with health care and disability issues were invited to a four-hour forum to discuss core questions developed by the core participants. The forum focused on the Wellness Policy Study progress to date. Simi Litvak of the World Institute on Disability presented a list of barriers to health care services and asked for feedback from the group. Each forum participant agreed to later prioritize the most important and timely options and identify ideas regarding what the RRTC might do to advance the selected priorities.
Policy Forum 2
Following the first Policy Forum of the RRTC in 2001, we conducted a second, larger Policy Forum in 2002. Thirty-eight representatives from Government, Disability Organizations and Universities met in Washington DC on June 11, 2002 for a Policy Forum on health disparities and health care access for people living with disabilities. The focus of the eight-hour meeting was on identifying areas where realistic and achievable policy reforms could be made. The first half of the forum consisted of presentations addressing access to healthcare and health disparities. Participants were then divided into four working groups: Legislation and Regulation, Legal Enforcement, Health Promotion Programs and Communication in the Healthcare System. One of the goals of the Policy Forum was to help strengthen the links between research, policy and practice. The forum therefore identified areas for improvement in access to healthcare as well as access to health promotion issues.
Participants were recruited through a collective effort of the Center. A list of participants was generated through feedback from RRTC partners and others in the field. A “save the date” e-mail was sent followed by calls from the RRTC staff. The forum was scheduled for June 11, 2002, one day prior to the annual NCIL conference. This was done in an effort to attract NCIL participants.
The RRTC staff worked with a conference coordinator who had a background in planning conferences and meetings including people with disabilities. We made great effort to meet the needs of all participants. All participants were asked to complete an evaluation form at the end of the day.
Evaluations
Feedback included specific suggestions for future Forums to have more time for working groups and to limit presentations. Amongst the feedback were suggestions of limiting the number of speakers and setting a time limit for each presentation. Possible suggestions for issues and topics to be addressed in next year’s forum included: 1) engaging CIL’s in the Health and Wellness issues, 2) addressing the perspectives of stakeholders—providers, enforcers, and employers, 3) placing more emphasis on matching responsibility for policy objectives with authority. We also obtained suggestions for other key informants that might be invited to next year’s forum. Amongst these suggestions were: AHRQ, HIAA, advocates, providers, enforcers, employers, Dave Gray- Welsh Uni., Glen White- U of Kansas, Doug Huntt- Ohio State Uni.., as well as insurers, and representatives from Medicare.
Recommendations
Because of the richness of the Policy Forum’s discussion and the participants’ expertise, we are currently developing the presentations and recommendations into formal proceedings for publication.
Examples of recommendations focus on:
HEALTH PROMOTION
1. Develop outcome evidence for health promotion programs targeting people living with disabilities.
2. Educating providers and people with disabilities around health promotion issues.
3. Finance of health promotion program for people living with disabilities (integration of existing programs).
4. Amend the Clinical Prevention Services Manual to include guidelines for delivering preventive health services for individuals with disabilities.
REGULATION AND LEGISLATION
-
The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) must revise the Medicare and Medicaid definitions of "durable medical equipment" to broaden the range of assistive technology provided.
-
Enforcement of the ADA as it relates to health care access issues
- The objectives of HP 2010 Chapter 6 should be rigorously pursued.
COMMUNICATION
-
Health Care providers need cultural competency training to improve their capacity to care for people with disabilities, individuals from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds, and individuals who do not speak English.
-
Providers need training in cultural competencies related to working with people with disabilities and working with non-English speaking individuals. There should be strong enforcement of section 508 with regard to web sites. Strong marketing messages should be created and disseminated to all health-related web sites regarding the importance of creating accessible web sites that will accommodate a wide range of people, increasing the numbers of individuals who can effectively use the information.
- Medical Information must be provided in alternative formats to ensure effective delivery of health care services for people with disabilities.
