Toolbox for Improving Program Processes and Health and Housing Outcomes: Experiences of the NYSDOH Lead Primary Prevention Program.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness
Advertisements

Targeted Case Management
School-Based Health Care 101 Understanding the Basics 1.
Measures of Child Well-Being from a Decentralized Statistical System: A View From the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics Stephen J. Blumberg, Ph.D.
A Report to the Community: Invest in Children’s Impact to Date Rob Fischer, Ph.D. Claudia Coulton, Ph.D.
Working Across Systems to Improve Outcomes for Young Children Sheryl Dicker, J.D. Assistant Professor of Pediatrics and Family and Social Medicine, Albert.
A Place to Call Home 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness November 2006.
Preventing Child Residential Lead Exposure by Window Replacement Funded By: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Michael Weitzman, 1 David.
Determining Your Program’s Health and Financial Impact Using EPA’s Value Proposition Brenda Doroski, Director Center for Asthma and Schools U.S. Environmental.
Early Childhood Intervention and Early Rehabilitation System in the Republic of Belarus.
Early Success A framework to ensure that ALL children and families in the District of Columbia are thriving... CHILDREN & FAMILIES Community Supports Education.
ARIZONA CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING OFFICE OF ENVIROMENTAL HEALTH Christine Cervantez Young PREVENTION PROGRAM.
Linking Actions for Unmet Needs in Children’s Health
Embedding the Early Brain & Child Development Framework into Quality Rating and Improvement Systems Meeting Name Presenter Name Date 1.
2.11 Conduct Medication Management University Medical Center Health System Lubbock, TX Jason Mills, PharmD, RPh Assistant Director of Pharmacy.
Soil and lead poisoning Mary Jo Trepka, MD, MSPH.
Printed by DEVELOPING A NON-PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM FOR THE STATE OF GEORGIA Scott A. Uhlich, MCP Georgia Department of Human.
A METHODOLOGY FOR MEASURING THE COST- UTILITY OF EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENTAL INTERVENTIONS Quality of improved life opportunities (QILO)
Labor Statistics in the United States Grace York March 2004.
1 Injury and Illness Surveillance. 2 Global Burden Non-fatal Occ Illness & Injury, WHO TRAUMATIC INJURY.
USING LAW FOR HEALTHY HOMES Priscilla Keith, JD Dana Reed Wise Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion county Indianapolis, Indiana.
1 CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
Childhood Lead Poisoning in New York State Symposium To Examine Lead Poisoning in NYS March 13, 2006 Rachel de Long, M.D., M.P.H. Director, Bureau of Child.
REAL-START : Risk Evaluation of Autism in Latinos (Screening Tools and Referral Training) Assuring No Child Enters Kindergarten With an Undetected Developmental.
NECTAC in collaboration with ITCA
A Brief Overview of California’s Early Start Program Early Intervention Services in California Developed by California MAP to Inclusion and Belonging…Making.
Memorial Hermann Healthcare System Clinical Integration & Disease Management Dan Wolterman April 15, 2010.
Future Research Agenda for MCH: Children with Special Health Care Needs November 10, 2004 Washington, DC Deborah Allen, ScD Boston University School of.
The Early Learning Challenge Fund: Metrics and Data Danielle Ewen February 22, 2010.
Head Start Health Regulations
Can Bright Futures Be Implemented in a Busy Clinical Setting? Lessons Learned from the Preventive Services Improvement Project: A National Collaborative.
Screening Implementation: Referral and Follow-up What Do You Do When the Screening Test Is of Concern? Paul H. Lipkin, MD D-PIP Training Workshop June.
5 th Annual Lourdes Cardiology Services Symposium: Cardiology for Primary Care.
Addressing Community Pb Concerns: A Health Screening and Education Approach Across Three States Mary O. Dereski, Ph.D. Associate Professor Institute of.
5 Year Results: New York State’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Primary Prevention Program Rebecca Morley, Executive Director National Center for.
Asthma Disparities – A Focused Examination of Race and Ethnicity on the Health of Massachusetts Residents Jean Zotter, JD Director, Asthma Prevention and.
Social Return on Investment: Practical Tools for Cost Benefit Analysis Reclaiming Futures Webinar Kristina Smock Consulting July 28, 2010.
Prevention and Early Intervention Linking Long-Term Vision with Short-Term Costs J effrey P oirier, B.A. M ary M agee Q uinn, Ph.D. American Institutes.
Collecting and Using Cost Data in the Orange County System of Care AEA – October 17, 2013 Brad R. Watts, Senior Research Scientist, Center for Human Services.
Oklahoma Parents as Teachers (OPAT) Program Results 1.
A NEW SYSTEM OF SUPPORT FOR INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES Recent Changes in the Provision of Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers with.
Improving Lead Screening Rates Through The Use of Statewide Immunization Registry Data Jacob L. Bidwell, MD Medical Director, Aurora Clarke Square Family.
Asset Building Strategies Mayors and Working Families: City Human Service Officials May 2, 2005.
Vol 115, No. 3, pp , March 2007
The Earlier The Better: Developmental Screening for Connecticut’s Young Children Lisa Honigfeld, Ph.D. Judith Meyers, Ph.D. Child Health and Development.
A Blueprint for Service Delivery
Integrating Behavioral Health and Primary Care
Case Management 410 IAC Local health officers shall ensure the provision of case management to all children under seven (7) years of age in their.
Key Elements of a Primary Prevention Program. Percent of Preschool Children Exceeding Selected Blood Lead Levels, NHANES II - III Pirkle JL, et al. Environ.
Preliminary Report Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee Cynthia L. Forland September 14, 2005 At-Risk Youth Study.
Quantifying the Value of Research in Indiana Tommy Nantung INDOT Research and Development Division AASHTO RAC Annual Meeting July 29, 2015 Portland, Oregon.
Pamela High MD 1 Pei Chi Wu MD 1 Stacey Aguiar MPH 2 Blythe Berger PhD 2 Autism CARES Meeting Bethesda, MD July 16, 2015.
House Education Committee February 4, Let’s take a look…
Multnomah County Employee Wellness Initiative Committee Board of County Commissioners Briefing September 4, 2012.
Board of Health Proposed 2011 Public Health Budget October 29, 2010 Dr. David Fleming Director and Health Officer.
The Reduction of Emergency Room Visits for Non- Emergent Health Concerns in Bakersfield, California Mariah Walton, MPH Public Health Advisor Office for.
Joy Hsu, M.S, M.D., Medical Officer National Center for Environmental Health Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects Centers for Disease Control.
The Research Behind Successful Supportive Housing September 2016.
Name(s) Here Job Title(s) Here.
Healthstat Employee Clinic
Lead Poisoning Cases Identified
Congress Considers Major Medicaid Changes
Medicaid Funded Lead Abatement and Statewide Lead-Safe Rental Registry
Primary Prevention/Section 8 Partnership Webinar
Overview: A Community Approach to Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention
HUD’s New Rule on Elevated Blood Lead Levels
TEXAS STUDY USED MORE THAN 1
1) Integrate data for better tracking of lead hazards
Lead Hazard Control Program Presentation 2018 Director Tania Menesse
Could It Happen Here? Lessons From The Flint Water Crisis…
Presentation transcript:

Toolbox for Improving Program Processes and Health and Housing Outcomes: Experiences of the NYSDOH Lead Primary Prevention Program

Panelists Moderator: Amy Murphy, MPH, Consultant & TA Provider to the NCHH & NYSDOH Panelists: Cathe Bullwinkle, Oneida County Health Department Debra Lewis, Onondaga County Health Department

Prevalence of Childhood Lead Poisoning New York State 4.8% United States 2.6%

NY State CLPPP 8 original pilot locations funded in 2007 YearFunding Amount $3 million $5 million $7.7 million $10 million 15 grantees operating through 2013

Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program – CLPPP Identify high risk housing Develop partnerships and engage the community Promote LHC interventions Build lead-safe work practice capacity Identify& leverage community resources FIVE GOALS

15 Target Counties

NCHH Provides technical & evaluation assistance Grantees required to conduct cost analysis and/or outcomes evaluation

Technical Assistance Briefs Cost Analysis Templates & Guidelines Effectiveness of targeting high risk blocks Post-remediation follow-up Projecting the burden of exposure in areas with low screening rates

Approaches to Cost Analysis Cost of Illness: Economic burden of a disease Cost Analysis: Value of the resources required to implement an intervention Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Costs saved because an adverse health condition was prevented Cost-Benefit Analysis: Net benefit determined by subtracting the monetary benefit (averted adverse health or environmental outcomes) from the cost of the intervention

Cost Analysis Health Care Expenditures Special Education Juvenile Delinquency Early Intervention Program Cost of Program Services Benefit of Window Replacement IQ & Lifetime Earnings Loss Return on investment

Cost of Illness  Magnitude of a public health problem in monetary terms  Medical, nonmedical, social and educational costs  Potential savings associated with an implementing an intervention

Health Care & Public Costs Direct health care costs of lead poisoning: –Screening –Medical Management –Nursing Case Management –Environmental Services 2006 Consumer Price Index Conservative estimates Includes only direct medical costs for children

Cost of Illness Estimates Blood Lead Level Number of Children Estimated Health care cost per child Cost Incurred 10-15µg/dL250$74$18, µg/dL150$74$11, µg/dL95$1,207$114, µg/dL5$1,335$6,675 >70µg/dL0$3, children Total Costs$150,949

Special Education Expenditures Impaired neurobehavioral function 20% of children with blood lead levels >25 µg/dL will need special education. School districts have average annual cost of special education Standard Education: $8,322 Special Education: $14,317 Differential: $5,995 Three years of special education needed on average

Juvenile Delinquency Estimated that 10% of juvenile delinquency may be attributed to lead poisoning. $34,000 per year to incarcerating youth.

IQ & Lifetime Earnings Loss Basic Formula IQ loss within BLL group X Earnings loss per IQ point X Number of children/ category = Net lifetime earnings loss

Mathematical formula for the 2-10 µg/dL group 1. Average Rate of IQ Loss per µg/dL within BLL Group X Total IQ Points Lost within BLL Group 5 x.513 = Lifetime Earning Loss X Total IQ Points Lost = Loss per child $18,948 X = $48, Applied to the number of children within BLL Group (60) Lifetime earning loss x Number of children 60 X $48,627 $2,917,636

IQ and Lifetime Earnings Loss Blood lead level Number of Children (Prevalence) Average Blood Lead Level Average Rate of IQ Loss per µg/dL within BLL Group Total IQ Points Lost within BLL Group Lifetime Earning Loss within BLL Group ($18,958, x Total IQ Points Lost) Applied to the number of children within BLL Group (Lifetime earning loss x number of children) 2-10 µg/dL $48,627$2,917, µg/dL $115,265$4,610,586 >20 µg/dL $133,275$1,332, Net lifetime earnings loss$8,860,969

Costs of Lead Exposure in NYS Cost of illness estimates 2010 Impact of lead exposure on health care expenditures, special education, and lifetime earnings loss NYC: $1,555,637,637 (62%) Cost of Illness - Childhood Lead Exposure New York State (including NY City) ImpactTotal Cost Health Care$3,281,942 Special Education$1,260,883 IQ and Lifetime Earnings Loss $2,514,923,250 Total$2,519,466,075

Early Intervention Identify children served by EIP Eliminate those served due to other issues De-identify eligible children Extract & organize EIP service data Link EIP services to costs

Oneida County Costs of Child Find & Early Intervention Newly Diagnosed Children with EBL > 15 ug/dL Refer all children < 3 at risk for developmental disabilities Screening - Ages & Stages Questionnaire 186 children –5.3% of all new admissions to CF & EIP

Calculating EIP Costs 1)Identify children with lead exposure being served by EIP. 1)Determine if children are being served by EIP because of lead exposure 2)De-identify the children by assigning a unique child ID. 3)Extract and obtain information on EIP services received and enter into an Excel spreadsheet. 1)Date of enrollment 2)Length of enrollment 3)Service type: Speech Language Pathology (SLP), Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical Therapy (PT), Special Instruction Teacher/Special Education services, Other Services 4)Determine costs for EIP Services (In Oneida County, the cost per unit is the same for all services) 4)Calculate the value of third party reimbursement for services (if available) 5)Calculate the cost of EIP services per year and per child.

Early Intervention Program Evaluation to assess & monitor needs –$59.43 per child Costs of Services: $134,414 ( ) –$4,596 Average Total Cost of EIP/Child –$2,143 Average Net Costs after Reimbursement/Child

Services Provide/Cost Analysis ServicesCost Breakdown Physical Therapy 77% Occupational Therapy16% Speech Therapy7%

Additional Efforts Cost of Illness Estimates Prevalence Decreases in Target Areas –Quantify the impact of program efforts over time

Onondaga Compare EIP Costs: Children identified with EBL > 5 ug/dL before EIP enrollment Children identified with EBL > 5 ug/dL after EIP enrollment Children receiving EIP services who did not have an EBL

Methodology Obtain EIP intake logs for 2009 < 36 months of age Match with LeadWeb Surveillance Data for children Extra EIP Child Service Reports of eligible children Calculate Costs of EIP services for each category

EIP Cost Comparison CategoryNumber of Children Average CostTotal Cost One BLL > 5ug/dL prior to EIP 67$2,994$200,580 One BLL >5 ug/dL after EIP enrollment 88$4,610$405,664 No BLL but tested prior to EIP 142$5,604$795,765 No BLL and not tested prior to EIP 73$9,115$664,606

Discussion of Findings Children without an EBL referred at an earlier age due to more severe delays and greater need for services? Would the findings have been different if used a threshold of 15 ug/dL? Need to control for age? Referral source? Look at multi-year service data?

LEAN QI Process Goal: To study the enforcement process Process Elements: Process mapping Visioning Time studies Policy review Inclusion of staff at all levels

Issues of Concern Gaining access/contacting tenants Multiple field visits Clerical task duplication Inefficient management of electronic documents Long compliance time frames Hearing schedule backlog

Policy & Procedure Changes Updated tenant screening form Integration of enforcement efforts – –Combine hearing notice, order posting, reinspections Notice & Information eliminated Policy on vacant properties Electronic case files and folders

Additional Efforts IQ & Lifetime Earnings Loss

Costs of Program Services 1. Document protocols or procedures 2. Specify staff roles 3. Develop time estimating worksheets 4.Document time for each step over a period of time 5. Average time across staff 6. Identify hourly rates 7. Calculate intervention costs 8. Determine indirect costs 9. Link to program outputs/activities

Risk Assessment Costs by Type Includes program activities from the time a housing unit is referred into the program thru dust wipe clearance. Risk Assessment - No hazards identified:$ Risk Assessment - Hazards identified:$1, Risk Assessment – Enforcement: $1, * Analysis: When enforcement is needed the costs to the program increases, at a minimum, by $ This cost is incurred per hearing date. Some cases have multiple hearing dates due to chronic non- compliance.

Monetary Benefit of Window Replacement Energy Star Window Savings: –15-24% reduction in energy bills –$20 for every dollar per year in energy savings Increase in Property Values: –$100 per window –95% costs of paint stabilization Health benefits: $6,847 Pre-1940 Housing $2, Housing $ Housing Formula: Market Value Benefit + Health Benefit – Lead Hazard Control Costs = Net Benefits (CBA) Varies by housing size, # of windows replaced and age of housing.

Data Required  Risk assessment costs  Window replacement costs  Paint stabilization costs  Cleanup and lead dust clearance costs  Number of windows replaced  Annual energy bill pre-lead hazard control

Monetary Benefit of Window Replacement Costs800 ft 2 Attached 7 Windows 1200 ft 2 Detached 10 Windows 1800 ft 2 Detached 16 Windows Window Replacement$6,118$9,684$15,494 Weighted Average Interior Paint Stabilization$146 Weighted Average Exterior Paint Stabilization$291 Specialized Cleanup$386$510 Lead Dust Clearance Testing$175$219 Average Cost$7,116$10,850$16,660 Annual Energy Savings (15%-25%)$ / yr$ / yr$ / yr Market Value Benefits Windows$5,485$8,681$13,890 Weighted Average Interior Paint Stabilization$144 Weighted Average Exterior Paint Stabilization$270 Average Market Value Benefit$5,899$9,095$14,304 Average Lead Hazard Reduction Benefit Weighted Average in Pre-1940 Housing$6,847 Weighted Average in 1940–1959 Housing$2,847 Weighted Average in 1960–1977 Housing$632

Formula Costs: Window Replacement: Actual Installed Cost$ Paint Stabilization: Actual Cost$ Cleanup and Lead Dust Clearance Testing: Actual Cost $ Total Cost = A$ Sum of all homes Market Value Benefits: Windows Market Benefit = $100/window + (20% of the previous year annual energy bill) x 20) $ Paint Stabilization Market Benefit = 95% of Actual Cost $ Total Market Value Benefit = B $ Sum of all homes Lead Hazard Reduction Benefits Pre-1940 units multiplied by $6,847$ units multiplied by $2,847$ units multiplied by times $632$ Applicable Lead Hazard Reduction Benefit = C $Sum of all homes Net Benefits: B + C - A $

Projecting Prevalence Step 1. Are the demographics of children screened the same as the general population of children? Prevalence rate X Number of children < 6 Step 2. If not representative…. Determine prevalence rates by race Multiply by the number of children of that racial/ethnic origin Add the projections to determine the burden of lead exposure

Effectiveness of Targeting High Risk Blocks Questions: Is there a neighborhood effect? Efficacy of canvassing and focusing on exterior lead hazard control. Identify comparable geographic areas Document baseline prevalence Determine post- intervention burden of lead exposure

Post-remediation Follow-up How long to housing units remain lead safe? What is the level of maintenance after LHC and how important is it? What is the contribution of dust lead tracked in from outside sources? What is the value of a lead safe housing registry? How realistic are community-wide remediation targets?

Post-remediation Follow-up Analysis Number & extent of LBP hazards at each interval. What rooms or components have a higher likelihood of reoccurring hazards? How long do housing units remain lead-safe? Where are dust lead levels the highest post remediation? Variance based on who conducted the work?

Considerations Change in inspectional/risk assessment protocols? Change in interventions standards? Change in who can conduct work? Systems requiring maintenance? Communicate results to owners.

Post-r em ediation Follow-up Options Comparison of baseline & post-remediation paint condition. Examination of post-remediation paint condition & dust levels. Comparison of baseline & post-remediation paint condition & dust levels.

Return on Investment Controlling lead hazards For every dollar spent on LHC, $17-$221 returned in health benefits, increased IQ, higher lifetime earnings, tax revenue, reduced spending on special education and reduced criminal activity Vaccination Returns $ $16.50 for every dollar invested in immunizations

References Gould E Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control. Environmental Health Perspectives. 117(7): Uses IQ point loss value of $17,815 from Schwartz, et al (1994) based on 2006 USD. Korfmacher KS Long-Term Costs of Lead Poisoning: How Much Can New York Save by Stopping Lead? Working Paper: Environmental Health Sciences Center, University of Rochester, 9 July Available: [accessed 10 October 2008]. Lanphear BP, Hornung R, Khoury J, Yolton K, Baghurst P, Bellinger DC, et al Low-Level Environmental Lead Exposure and Children’s Intellectual Function: An Interna­tional Pooled Analysis. Environmental Health Perspectives. 113: Nevin R, Jacobs D, Berg M, Cohen J Monetary Benefits of Preventing Childhood Lead Poisoning with Lead-Safe Window Replacement. Environmental Research. 106: Oklahoma Department of Health. September Economic Impact of Childhood Lead Poisoning. The Bulletin. pp Uses IQ point loss value of $18,958 based on 2009 USD (adjusted for inflation). Zhou F, Santoli J, Messonnier ML, Yusuf HR, Shefer A, Chu SY Economic Evaluation of the 7- Vaccine Routine Child­hood Immunization Schedule in the United States, Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 159:1136–1144.

Questions?