Changes in the monitoring and oversight practices of not-for-profit hospital governing boards 1989-2005: evidence from three national surveys.

Despite the legal and practical importance of monitoring and oversight of management by hospital governing boards, there is little empirical evidence of how hospital boards fulfill these roles and the extent to which these practices have changed over time. We utilize data from three national surveys of hospital governance to examine how oversight and monitoring practices in public and private not-for-profit (NFP) hospital boards have changed over time. Findings suggest that board relations with CEOs in NFP hospitals display important but potentially contradictory patterns. On the one hand, NFP hospital boards appear to be exercising more stringent oversight of management and hospital performance. On the other hand, management is more actively involved with governance matters with less separation of board and management. This general pattern varies by the dimension of oversight and monitoring practice and by specific characteristics of NFP hospitals.

An empirical taxonomy of hospital governing board roles.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a taxonomy of governing board roles in U.S. hospitals. DATA SOURCES: 2005 AHA Hospital Governance Survey, 2004 AHA Annual Survey of Hospitals, and Area Resource File. STUDY DESIGN: A governing board taxonomy was developed using cluster analysis. Results were validated and reviewed by industry experts. Differences in hospital and environmental characteristics across clusters were examined. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: One-thousand three-hundred thirty-four hospitals with complete information on the study variables were included in the analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Five distinct clusters of hospital governing boards were identified. Statistical tests showed that the five clusters had high internal reliability and high internal validity. Statistically significant differences in hospital and environmental conditions were found among clusters. CONCLUSIONS: The developed taxonomy provides policy makers, health care executives, and researchers a useful way to describe and understand hospital governing board roles. The taxonomy may also facilitate valid and systematic assessment of governance performance. Further, the taxonomy could be used as a framework for governing boards themselves to identify areas for improvement and direction for change.

An end to perinatal HIV: success in the US requires ongoing and innovative efforts that should expand globally.

The dramatic reduction of perinatally transmitted HIV in the United States has been a striking success story in the HIV epidemic. Routine HIV screening during pregnancy followed by appropriate therapy has been extremely effective. This paper puts forth three strategies needed to maintain these gains and reach the goal of eliminating perinatal HIV: standardize medical interventions and policy changes that support perinatal HIV reduction; institute HIV screening in routine preconception care to identify HIV infection in women before pregnancy; and critically focus attention and resources on primary prevention of HIV infection in women. Healthcare providers should incorporate HIV prevention education and routine screening into women's primary health care. Public health leaders should support and fund prevention strategies directed at young women. Successful approaches that have nearly eliminated perinatal HIV transmission in the United States offer valuable lessons that should be applied to primary HIV prevention for women in the United States and globally.

The value of collaboration in eliminating barriers to preventive care and screening among underserved populations.

Collaboration among a community's institutions and its residents can help increase the use of appropriate screening, preventive, and primary care services. To improve the health of the community, institutions must reach out to their colleagues and other stakeholders. They must not only deal with the structure of the healthcare delivery system but also be responsive to the characteristics of the local population groups they are trying to serve. Over the last several years, a group of 25 community-based partnerships across the country have used a multifaceted model to guide their work in making their communities healthier. Through a wide variety of initiatives tailored to local needs, they have not only improved people's health but also provided a series of benefits to the partnering organizations and the community as a whole.

Evaluating partnerships for community health improvement: tracking the footprints.

Private-public partnerships are increasingly seen as an important mechanism for improving community health. Despite their popularity, traditional evaluations of these efforts have produced negative or mixed results. This is often attributed to weak interventions or an insufficient period of time to observe an impact. This study examines two additional possibilities--the need for a well-articulated shared vision and the governance and management capabilities of the partnership itself. We conducted a midstream process evaluation of twenty-five community partnerships associated with the Community Care Network (CCN) Demonstration Program. We examined how the roles of a common shared vision, strong governance, and effective management influence a partnership's ability to achieve its objectives. The findings, based on both qualitative and quantitative analyses, underscore the importance of membership organizations' perceived benefits and costs of participation and management capabilities to the partnership's progress toward a vision. Based on the qualitative data, six key governance and management characteristics are identified that separate the top performing partnerships from the lowest performing ones. We explore the implications of this research for future evaluations of public-private community health partnerships.