January 2005

Grant Results

SUMMARY

From 1999 to 2004, the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative (the collaborative) brought together the region's six state public health departments, major managed care organizations, the regional office of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Brandeis University in an effort to improve the health of New Englanders.

Key Results
The collaborative:

  • Helped four work groups produce recommendations for regional initiatives to address pediatric asthma, adult immunizations, diabetes and tobacco cessation.
  • Created a pediatric asthma action plan, produced an asthma toolkit, supported asthma research and worked with other local organizations to disseminate the action plan.
  • Promoted information sharing between managed care and public health by hosting forums and meetings on diabetes, tobacco cessation and genetic testing.
  • Conducted two evaluations. The University of Massachusetts Medical School's Center for Health Policy and Research, one of the evaluators, found that the collaborative fostered a new level of understanding between managed care and public health by providing a forum for sharing resources and best practices (New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Phase One Evaluation (1998–2000); see the Bibliography).

Funding
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) supported the project with two grants totaling $437,132 between May 1999 and April 2004.

 See Grant Detail & Contact Information
 Back to the Table of Contents


THE PROBLEM

In the 1990s, managed care organizations steered away from supporting initiatives to advance the health of the population as a whole because of concerns about the cost of such investments. Managed care and public health leaders in New England, however, were convinced that combining forces would improve the health of the communities they served.

In 1998, at the New England Region Medicine and Public Health Congress, a meeting partially supported by RWJF, managed care and public health leaders in the six New England states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont) agreed to launch the New England Regional Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative.

The collaborative also included the regional office of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Schneider Institute for Health Policy, a research center of Brandeis University's Heller School for Social Policy and Management (formerly the Florence Heller Graduate School for Advanced Studies in Social Welfare). Brandeis University served as the institutional home and financial agent for the collaborative.

The collaborative formed a steering committee comprised of executives of New England managed care plans and public health agencies to oversee the project (see Appendix 1 for a list of steering committee members) and three work groups to develop recommendations and plans for: pediatric asthma, adult immunization and smoking cessation (quitting).

The work groups, co-chaired by a public health officer and a managed care medical director from the steering committee, were comprised of public health and managed care experts in the respective topics. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Massachusetts health plans provided initial support.

 Back to the Table of Contents


RWJF STRATEGY

This project advanced RWJF's Public Health team's objective of promoting research and tool development to enhance understanding and action for population health improvement. To further this objective, RWJF supports projects that use consultation and consensus to create, field test and diffuse successful strategies for building the public health information infrastructure and leadership capacity.

 Back to the Table of Contents


THE PROJECT

Project staff at Brandeis University and members of the collaborative finalized planning for and began implementing the New England Regional Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative.

Under the first grant (ID# 036200), the collaborative was expanded to include the majority of managed care organizations and public health agencies in the region, as well as other organizations (see Appendix 2 for a list of collaborative members).

The collaborative drafted regional strategies for health improvement and added diabetes as a fourth focus area. The work groups prepared reports outlining their recommendations for pediatric asthma, adult immunization, smoking cessation and diabetes; the reports covered:

  1. Effective public health and clinical practices.
  2. Health messages to support recommended practices.
  3. Strategies for implementing public health and clinical practices.

RWJF awarded the collaborative, through Brandeis University, a second grant (ID# 040002) to:

  • Demonstrate that the collaborative represented a useful model for achieving regional health improvements.
  • Implement pilot tests of the priority recommendations in pediatric asthma, adult immunization, smoking cessation and diabetes in selected public health agencies and managed care organizations in New England.
  • Establish a fifth work group on genetic testing.
  • Conduct two process evaluations (what the collaborative is doing and how well it is doing) to determine whether the collaborative's activities were useful to its stakeholders.

In the first year of the first grant, collaborative leaders observed that state-level organizations were already engaged in health improvement projects that combined the resources of state public health departments and managed care.

To avoid duplicating these efforts, the collaborative decided to focus on information sharing and networking across the six states rather than the implementation of new regional health improvement projects. The activities of most of the work groups reflected this shift in the collaborative's strategic direction. However, the Pediatric Asthma Work Group designed and implemented a multi-state program intervention in its topic area in addition to conducting education and research activities.

The other four work groups (Adult Immunization, Diabetes, Genetic Testing and Smoking Cessation) emphasized educational and networking activities by sponsoring regional conferences, holding meetings and exchanging information on the collaborative's Web site. Changes in the health care environment prevented two of the work groups from fully achieving their objectives.

Severe cuts in state funding for tobacco programs hampered the Smoking Cessation Work Group's efforts to further collaborations related to state-managed quit lines (one-on-one smoking cessation telephone counseling). The Adult Immunization Work Group could not launch regional initiatives due to the long planning cycle for state immunization programs and fluctuations in the supply of vaccines.

The steering committee, established in 1998, guided the project through both grants. John Snow, a public health consulting firm headquartered in Boston, assisted the work groups in developing their recommendations.

 Back to the Table of Contents


RESULTS

Project staff reported the following results in a report to RWJF:

  • The Pediatric Asthma Work Group:
    • Created and supported the dissemination of a pediatric asthma action plan. The work group produced an easy-to-use action plan and worked with lead organizations in each state to distribute it to pediatricians, family practitioners, specialists and school nurses in Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Consistent with the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute's recommendations for asthma management, the collaborative's asthma action plan is a written document, designed by the physician, patient and family, that describes step-by-step procedures for living with asthma and provides guidance on how and when to seek emergency care.
    • Produced a toolkit to help providers, patients and families use asthma medications more effectively. The toolkit (available online) provides a comprehensive set of user-friendly resources to assist physicians and families in the effective use of pediatric asthma medications. These resources assist the physician in disease severity classification and prescribing appropriate medications, and teach patients and their families about asthma medications. The collaborative distributed the toolkit to 100 organizations in the six New England states, which used it to educate and train various audiences. For example, the Connecticut Department of Public Health used the toolkit to develop an asthma toolkit for teens, and the Boston Public Health Commission used it to train school nurses.
    • Conducted research on asthma surveillance and insurance coverage for environmental interventions. The collaborative supported the two studies in partnership with the Asthma Regional Council (a Boston-based coalition focused on asthma surveillance and environmental issues that later received a RWJF grant ID# 046568, see After the Grant). The Tellus Institute, a nonprofit environmental research and consulting group, conducted the two studies under a subcontract. See Appendix 3 for details about these studies.
    • Created an inventory of asthma education campaigns in New England. The inventory lists 26 public health departments, health plans, hospitals and agencies in New England that have mounted asthma-related public education campaigns. It is available from the collaborative Web site under Pediatric Asthma/Information-sharing/Pediatric Asthma tables.
  • The Diabetes Work Group sponsored a regional conference and a small grant program designed to facilitate the New England states in sharing information about innovations and collaboration related to chronic disease management. More than 100 of the region's insurers, health care purchasers, provider organizations and state and federal officials attended "Realigning Payment Policies and Incentives for High Quality Diabetes Care," held on May 13, 2003, in Manchester, N.H. Following the conference, the collaborative awarded grants of about $2,500 to Maine and Rhode Island to conduct planning meetings for collaborative activities, Vermont to hire speakers on chronic care collaboratives for diabetes and Massachusetts to prepare grant proposals for a diabetes best practices program.
  • The Tobacco Cessation Work Group and the American Cancer Society co-hosted a forum that focused on the importance of the business case for health plan coverage of smoking cessation treatment. Thirty regional and national organizations attended the forum, "Best Practice Tobacco Cessation Health Plan Benefits and Programs," held on October 8, 2003, in Boston.
  • The Genetic Testing Work Group hosted a symposium on setting genetic testing policy. To plan the agenda, the work group conducted interviews with about 20 public health and managed care staff prior to the symposium. Thirty-five representatives of health plans, public health agencies and providers participated in the symposium, "Creating a Framework for Setting Genetic Testing Policy," held on July 14, 2003, in Waltham, Mass. The collaborative produced a summary report and distributed it to attendees.

 Back to the Table of Contents


EVALUATION

The second grant (ID# 040002) funded subcontracts for two evaluations. The Center for Health Policy and Research at the University of Massachusetts Medical School conducted an evaluation of the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative that covered 1998 through 2000. Evaluators sought to:

  1. Determine the steps the collaborative took to achieve its initial goals and whether the collaborative achieved those goals.
  2. Identify barriers to implementation and classify them as specific to a location or general barriers.
  3. Determine how activities were useful to the steering committee and work groups and how activities could be made more useful.

They conducted two personal and 17 telephone interviews with collaborative participants, including representatives of public health and managed care organizations throughout the New England region.

In addition, consultant Hope Worden Kenefick assessed the collaborative's asthma action plan, the initiative the collaborative identified as having the most promise for region-wide implementation. This evaluation focused on:

  1. The extent to which the three participating states (Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island) incorporated and institutionalized the asthma action plan into their organizational systems and practices.
  2. Ways in which the asthma action plan has improved asthma management for children.
  3. Ways in which the asthma action plan could be improved.

Kenefick conducted telephone interviews with 10 representatives of public health departments, health plans and quality assurance organizations who worked on the asthma action plan; and she collected data from 133 school nurses and 530 clinicians in Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island through surveys, telephone interviews and one focus group. In Connecticut, she conducted a focus group with 10 school nurses and conducted telephone interviews with 10 physicians at the Connecticut Department of Health. In Massachusetts, 454 (16.7 percent) of 2,711 physicians completed a mailed survey, and 15 school nurses participated in telephone interviews. In Rhode Island, 65 (13.5 percent) of 479 physicians and 108 (22.1 percent) of 408 school nurses completed a faxed survey.

 Back to the Table of Contents


EVALUATION FINDINGS

The Center for Health Policy and Research reported the following evaluation findings in New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Phase One Evaluation (1998–2000) (March 2002):

  • The New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative fostered a new level of understanding between managed care and public health, breaking down misconceptions and providing each with needed insights into the priorities, constraints and operation of the other. According to one survey respondent, "Managed care brings a delivery system—physicians and customers—whereas public health has the messages and community stature. Together they complement one another."
  • The collaborative provided a forum for sharing resources and best practices and stimulated new partnerships.
  • The participation of the federal government (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) and an academic institution (Brandeis University) strengthened the collaborative. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' neutrality facilitated initiatives that involved multiple states and public health and managed care. Brandeis University provided a public policy perspective and a neutral home for grant applications and funding.
  • The collaborative benefited from strong steering committee leadership. The commitment of the steering committee, and the high visibility and personal contacts of the chairs, enabled the collaborative to build membership.

Kenefick reported the following evaluation findings in New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Evaluation of the Asthma Action Plan Initiative (December 2003):

  • The New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative is a useful model for developing and implementing regional health improvement activities. She notes particularly its leadership, coordination of communication and information and facilitation of partnerships and networking; the ability of participants to benefit from experiences in other states; and the flexible framework and resources it provided.
  • The majority of the 530 clinicians surveyed used asthma action plans (81 percent in Connecticut, 61 percent in Massachusetts and 68 percent in Rhode Island). Among asthma action plan users, the majority (66 percent in Massachusetts and 80 percent in Rhode Island; figures for Connecticut are not available) chose the collaborative's plan. Clinicians use asthma action plans because they feel they are important.
  • School nurses believe that asthma action plans have a positive impact on children's academic and clinical outcomes; however, they have received few action plans from clinicians. The 133 nurses surveyed estimated that action plans were on file for 10 to 15 percent of students with asthma in their schools. They believed that clinicians would be more likely to use the plans if they better understood the school nurse's role in managing pediatric asthma.
  • The majority of clinicians in Massachusetts and Rhode Island believe that asthma action plans are helpful. They help to teach patients and parents about asthma (96 percent in Massachusetts and 95 percent in Rhode Island), help parents manage their children's asthma (91 percent in Massachusetts and 93 percent in Rhode Island), and are useful for coordinating care with school nurses (77 percent in Massachusetts; figures not available for Rhode Island). No figures were available for Connecticut.
  • Physicians recommended strategies for improving the asthma action plan. These included providing better written instructions about the plans' purpose and use and allotting more space on the form for noting medications, symptoms and related conditions. Some physicians preferred an electronic version that they could personalize and include in a patient's electronic medical record.

Limitations

The majority of survey respondents used asthma action plans; therefore, their responses may not represent the attitudes and experiences of clinicians who do not use asthma action plans.

Recommendations

Kenefick made the following recommendations for using a regional collaborative to improve health in New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Evaluation of the Asthma Action Plan Initiative (December 2003):

  1. Engage effective leadership to attract the right partners.
  2. Hire a person to staff the collaboration's work early on.
  3. Anticipate who will need to support and/or sign off on products and get them involved early.
  4. Design a strategy for integrating new partners into the collaboration and orient them without slowing down the work in progress.
  5. When holding meetings or conference calls for collaboration partners, develop clear agendas, ensure careful facilitation of calls and limit participation to only those who are necessary.
  6. Utilize methods of communication appropriate for various purposes (e.g., concrete tasks versus information sharing and networking).
  7. Ensure collaboration partners are aware of the collaboration's work with other organizations addressing the same issue and what those organizations are doing to address the issue.

Communications

Members of the work group worked with staff of lead organizations in each state that were responsible for the dissemination of the action plan. The collaborative's Web site provides general information and grant products, including the asthma action plan, toolkit and evaluation report. The asthma materials are also available on the Asthma Regional Council's Web site. See the Bibliography for details.

 Back to the Table of Contents


LESSONS LEARNED

  1. Flexibility helps projects succeed. When states began conducting quality improvement initiatives involving public health and managed care, the collaborative shifted its focus to serving as a regional forum rather than duplicating state efforts. (Project Director)
  2. Timing is critical in successful projects. The Pediatric Asthma Work Group was able to identify relevant projects because asthma care was a high priority in the states. In contrast, funding for smoking cessation was decreasing at the state level and the Smoking Cessation Work Group was unable to accomplish much. (Project Director)

 Back to the Table of Contents


AFTER THE GRANT

Although the collaborative dissolved after RWJF funding ended, some projects begun during the project continue. RWJF supported the New England Asthma Regional Council in developing both new programming and a fundraising plan to address environmental causes of asthma (see Grant Results on ID# 046568). The Asthma Regional Council is continuing environmental initiatives for asthma management, including preparing a White Paper summarizing findings from the surveys of researchers and payers conducted as part of the project and hosting a symposium on environmental controls for asthma. The regional office of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services continues to work with collaborative partners to improve diabetes care.

 Back to the Table of Contents


GRANT DETAILS & CONTACT INFORMATION

Project

New England Regional Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative

Grantee

Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management (Waltham,  MA)

  • Amount: $ 50,000
    Dates: May 1999 to April 2000
    ID#:  036200

  • Amount: $ 387,132
    Dates: June 2001 to April 2004
    ID#:  040002

Contact

Amy Rosenstein
(617) 354-1497
arosenstein@policy-studies.com

Web Site

http://sihp.brandeis.edu/project_details_129.html

 Back to the Table of Contents


APPENDICES


Appendix 1

(Current as of the time of the grant; provided by the grantee organization; not verified by RWJF.)

New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Steering Committee (as of March 2002)

Philip Boulter, M.D.
Chief Medical Officer
Tufts Associated Health Plan
Waltham, Mass.

Elena Nicollela
Health Insurance Specialist
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Baltimore, Md.

Marylou Buyse, M.D.
President
Massachusetts Association of Health Plans
Boston, Mass.

Michael Doonan Ph.D.
Heller Graduate School at Brandeis University
Waltham, Mass.

Terence Fitzgerald, M.D.
Medical Director of Asthma Disease Management Program
Oxford Health Plans, Inc.
Trumbull, Conn.

William Kassler, M.D.
State Medical Director
New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services
Concord, N.H.

Roderick King, M.D., M.P.H.
Division Director, Field Office
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Region 1
Boston, Mass.

Debbie Klein Walker, Ed.D.
Associate Commissioner
Massachusetts Department of Health
Boston, Mass.

John McDonough, Dr.P.H.
Senior Associate
Heller Graduate School at Brandeis University
Waltham, Mass.

Paul Mendis, M.D.
Deputy Medical Director
Neighborhood Health Plan
Boston, Mass.

Dora Ann Mills, M.D., M.P.H.
Director and State Officer
Maine Bureau of Health
Augusta, Maine

Patrician Nolan, M.D., M.P.H.
Director of Health
Rhode Island Department of Health
Providence, R.I.

David Parrella
Director of Medical Care Administration
Connecticut Department of Social Services
Hartford, Conn.

Helen Riehle
Executive Director
Vermont Program for Quality Health Care
Montpelier, Vt.

Anthony Robbins, M.D.
Professor and Chair
Department of Family Medicine and Community Health
Tufts University School of Medicine
Medford, Mass.

Marie Roberto, Dr.P.H.
Chief, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
Connecticut Department of Public Health
Hartford, Conn.

Betsy Rosenfeld
Deputy Regional Health Administrator
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Boston, Mass.

Amy Rosenstein
Executive Director
New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative
Waltham, Mass.

Rachel Rowe
Executive Director
New Hampshire Foundation for Healthy Communities
Concord, N.H.

Renee Rulin, M.D.
Medical Director
Neighborhood Health Plan of Rhode Island
Providence, R.I.

Robert Scalettar, M.D., M.P.H.
Vice President, Medical Policy & Chief Medical Officer
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield
North Haven, Conn.

Jonathan Stewart
JSI Research and Training Institute
Boston, Mass.

Don Swartz, M.D.
Division of Health Improvement
Vermont Department of Health
Montpelier, Vt.

Albert Yee, M.D., M.P.H.
Regional Health Administrator
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Region 1
Boston, Mass.


Appendix 2

(Current as of the time of the grant; provided by the grantee organization; not verified by RWJF.)

Members of the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative

Alliance for Health Care Quality Improvement
Boston, Mass.

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield
North Haven, Conn.

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Baltimore, Md.

Cigna/Healthsource
Manchester, N.H.

Connecticut Department of Public Health
Hartford, Conn.

Maine Bureau of Health
Augusta, Maine

Massachusetts Association of Health Plans
Boston, Mass.

Massachusetts Department of Health
Boston, Mass.

Neighborhood Health Plan
Boston, Mass.

Neighborhood Health Plan of Rhode Island
Providence, R.I.

New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services
Concord, N.H.

New Hampshire Foundation for Healthy Communities
Concord, N.H.

Oxford Health Plans, Inc.
Trumbull, Conn.

Rhode Island Department of Health
Providence, R.I.

Tufts Associated Health Plan
Waltham, Mass.

Tufts University School of Medicine
Medford, Mass.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Region 1
Boston, Mass.

Vermont Program for Quality Health Care
Montpelier, Vt.

Vermont Department of Health
Montpelier, Vt.


Appendix 3

(Current as of the time of the grant; provided by the grantee organization; not verified by RWJF.)

Findings from Tellus Institute's Asthma Research Studies

The Tellus Institute, a non-profit environmental research and consulting group based in Boston, conducted two asthma research studies under a subcontract with the Asthma Regional Council and the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative.

The first study examined environmental triggers of asthma, the effectiveness of indoor environmental interventions and the types of information insurers need to make coverage decisions. For this study, the first phase of the Asthma Regional Council's multiyear Environmental Investments Project, Tellus interviewed eight asthma researchers and 11 health plan executives.

The second study assessed the use of Medicaid fee-for-service and managed care data to track asthma in New England. Tellus Institute staff interviewed personnel from state health departments and Medicaid agencies, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Findings
The Tellus Institute summarized its findings regarding insurer coverage of environmental interventions in two reports: Executive Summary of Environmental Researcher Interviews: Environmental Investments Project and Executive Summary of Regional Health Payer Interviews: Environmental Investments Project (available at the Asthma Regional Council Web site):

  • Researchers feared that payers and policy-makers may fail to support widespread adoption of environmental interventions for asthma, despite evidence of their effectiveness. Researchers speculated that interventions for other chronic diseases may have larger cost savings. Also, interventions such as in-home environmental assessments and education are too costly to implement in an era of drastic cost-cutting measures in both the public and private sectors.
  • Best practices research typically focuses on multifaceted interventions and fails to assess the effectiveness of more modest individual interventions, which payers can more easily incorporate into their programs and benefits. For example, several researchers noted the paucity of published research comparing health plans' education and telephone-based case management with multifaceted interventions.
  • Payers and researchers agree on the need for enhanced communication about strategies for translating research into programmatic and policy decisions. Respondents expressed a belief that a symposium on the science and financing of environmental interventions would help improve relationships between the payers and researchers.
  • Both researchers and payers believed they would reap mutual benefits from a collaborative research agenda. Sharing health plan data would help researchers, while the publication of study results would provide health plans with information to support decision-making and increase their credibility with consumers.

In Using Medicaid Fee for Service and Managed Care Data to Track Asthma in New England: A Status Report (Asthma Research Council, 2004), the Tellus Institute summarized findings of its asthma surveillance study:

  • All six New England state departments of public health have asthma programs, although not all are currently using Medicaid data for asthma surveillance. Although all six states believed that Medicaid data can supplement current asthma surveillance efforts, only three state asthma programs (Maine, Rhode Island and Vermont) had access to information on asthma from Medicaid data.
  • Medicaid data should be one part of a larger asthma surveillance system that also includes the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, data from emergency departments and hospitals, and school-based surveys. Most of those interviewed believe that Medicaid data should be supplemented with data from the general non-Medicaid population.
  • Given high rates of asthma in New England, respondents agreed on the benefits of a regional perspective on the problem. Respondents also recognized that producing accurate regional estimates of asthma in the Medicaid population could be difficult due to variability of Medicaid eligibility, organizational structures and benefits across states. Several New England states expressed interest in reaching consensus on the "best" definition to identify asthma cases for Medicaid enrollees.

 Back to the Table of Contents


BIBLIOGRAPHY

(Current as of date of this report; as provided by grantee organization; not verified by RWJF; items not available from RWJF.)

Articles

Kenefick H, Rosenstein A and Doonan M. "Addressing Obstacles to the Utilization of Pediatric Asthma Action Plans." Unpublished.

Reports

Hoppin P. Executive Summary of Environmental Researcher Interviews: Environmental Investments Project. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England. Also appears online.

Hoppin P. Executive Summary of Regional Health Payer Interviews: Environmental Investments Project. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England. Also appears online.

Kenefick H. Evaluation of the Asthma Action Plan Initiative. Waltham, MA: New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative, December 2003. Also appears online.

Lichter E. Using Medicaid Fee for Service and Managed Care Data to Track Asthma in New England: A Status Report. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England, 2004.

Lichter E. A Regional Approach to School-based Asthma Surveillance in New England. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England, 2004.

Creating a Framework for Setting Genetic Testing Policy. Waltham, MA: New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative, 2003.

New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative Phase One Evaluation (1998 to 2000). Worcester, MA: Center for Health Policy & Research, University of Massachusetts Medical School, March 2002.

Options for a Regional Approach to School-Based Asthma Surveillance in New England. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England, 2004.

Survey Instruments

"Massachusetts Clinician Survey Regarding Asthma Action Plans." New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative and Massachusetts Health Quality Partners, fielded May–June 2003.

"Rhode Island School Nurse Survey Regarding Asthma Action Plans." New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative and Massachusetts Health Quality Partners, fielded May–June 2003.

"Rhode Island Provider Survey Regarding Asthma Action Plans." New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative and Massachusetts Health Quality Partners, fielded May–June 2003.

World Wide Web Sites

http://sihp.brandeis.edu/project_details_129.html. Web site of the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative. The Web site provides information on the background and mission of the collaborative as well as information on each of the five Collaborative Work Groups: Pediatric Asthma, Diabetes, Adult Immunization, Tobacco Cessation and Genetic Testing. Waltham, MA: Schneider Institute for Health Policy, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, 2002.

www.asthmaregionalcouncil.org/NEPHMCC.htm. Web site of the Asthma Regional Council. On May 1, 2004, when the RWJF grant ended and the Collaborative suspended operations, the Asthma Regional Council became the host Web site for asthma-related materials of the New England Public health and managed Care Collaborative. Dorchester, MA: Asthma Regional Council of New England, May 2004.

Sponsored Conferences

"Realigning Healthcare Payment Policies and Incentives for High Quality Diabetes Care," May 13, 2003, Manchester, NH. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Region I (New England) and the New England Public Health and managed Care Collaborative and Vermont Program for Quality in Health Care. Attended by approximately 100 registrants. Examples of organizations represented include state public health departments from the six New England states and Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield. One keynote presentation, one panel and one breakout session.

"Creating a Framework for Setting Genetic Testing Policy," June 14, 2003, Waltham, Mass. Sponsored by the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative. Attended by 35 registrants. Examples of organizations represented include Maine Bureau of Health, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care and the New England Regional Genetics Group. Three presentations.

"Best Practice Tobacco Cessation Health Plan Benefits and Programs," October 8, 2003, Boston. Sponsored by the New England Public Health and Managed Care Collaborative. Attended by representatives of 30 regional and national organizations.

 Back to the Table of Contents


Report prepared by: Jayme Hannay
Reviewed by: Lori De Milto
Reviewed by: Molly McKaughan
Program Officer: Susan B. Hassmiller

Most Requested