Choose either the Santilli et al or Crabtree et al article from the assigned readings’

1. 1. How did the authors use community assessment tools to tackle a public health issue relevant to the community?

SOLUTION

Comparing how the Santilli et al and Crabtree et al articles used community assessment tools to tackle public health issues:

The Santilli et al article describes a community health assessment conducted in two rural counties in Oregon to understand youth substance use. The researchers used the Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships (MAPP) framework to guide their assessment. This involved forming a community partnership, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data, identifying strategic issues, formulating goals and strategies, and planning for action. Some of the specific tools used included surveys of youth and parents, focus groups with youth, interviews with community leaders, and secondary analysis of existing data on substance use rates. This allowed them to gain a comprehensive picture of youth substance use in the community from multiple perspectives.

Based on the data collected, they identified several strategic issues related to youth substance use, including access and exposure, community norms favorable toward use, and lack of recreational opportunities. Goals formulated to address these issues emphasized collaboration across community agencies, educating youth and parents, enforcing laws, and promoting positive norms. Strategies included implementing school-based prevention programs, strengthening enforcement, creating a media campaign, and forming a substance use prevention coalition. This demonstrates how the MAPP process enabled a detailed community health assessment centered on youth substance use in order to inform targeted strategies for improvement.

In contrast, the Crabtree et al article describes a community health assessment focused on obesity and chronic disease in a rural Kentucky county. The researchers used a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach that engaged community members in all phases of the research. They formed a community advisory board with representatives from healthcare, education, government, and the community. This board helped guide the assessment process, which included secondary analysis of existing health indicators, focus groups with residents, and a telephone survey of adults in the county.

The data collected highlighted obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and physical inactivity as priority issues in the community. In terms of goals, the researchers focused on increasing collaboration between community groups, expanding chronic disease prevention programs, and improving access to physical activity options. Strategies developed included creating community gardens and walking trails, implementing worksite wellness programs, and launching healthy cooking classes. A key recommendation was developing an interagency council to coordinate these activities long-term. The CBPR approach allowed the assessment to be community-driven and develop locally relevant strategies.

In summary, while the assessments had different health focuses, both articles demonstrate the value of using community assessment tools like MAPP and CBPR to understand local public health issues. Engaging community members, collecting diverse data, and identifying strategic goals and actions were key features of both approaches. The tools served to develop a comprehensive understanding of community needs and actionable strategies based on this understanding. This highlights how robust community assessment processes are critical to tackling pressing public health problems at the local level.