Wendy R Ellis1, William H Dietz2. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC. Electronic address: wendye@gwu.edu. 2. Sumner Redstone Global Center for Prevention and Wellness, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We propose a transformative approach to foster collaboration across child health, public health, and community-based agencies to address the root causes of toxic stress and childhood adversity and to build community resilience. METHODS: Physicians, members of social service agencies, and experts in toxic stress and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) were interviewed to inform development of the Building Community Resilience (BCR) model. Through a series of key informant interviews and focus groups, we sought to understand the role of BCR for child health systems and their partners to reduce toxic stress and build community resilience to improve child health outcomes. RESULTS: Key informants indicated the intentional approach to ACEs and toxic stress through continuous quality improvement (data-driven decisions and program development, partners testing and adapting to changes to their needs, and iterative development and testing) which provides a mechanism by which social determinants or a population health approach could be introduced to physicians and community partners as part of a larger effort to build community resilience. Structured interviews also reveal a need for a framework that provides guidance, structure, and support for child health systems and community partners to develop collective goals, shared work plans, and a means for data-sharing to reinforce the components that will contribute to community resilience. CONCLUSIONS: Key informant interviews and focus group dialogues revealed a deep understanding of the factors related to toxic stress and ACEs. Respondents endorsed the BCR approach as a means to explore capacity issues, reduce fragmented health care delivery, and facilitate integrated systems across partners in efforts to build community resilience. Current financing models are seen as a potential barrier, because they often do not support restructured roles, partnership development, and the work to sustain upstream efforts to address toxic stress and community resilience.
OBJECTIVE: We propose a transformative approach to foster collaboration across child health, public health, and community-based agencies to address the root causes of toxic stress and childhood adversity and to build community resilience. METHODS: Physicians, members of social service agencies, and experts in toxic stress and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) were interviewed to inform development of the Building Community Resilience (BCR) model. Through a series of key informant interviews and focus groups, we sought to understand the role of BCR for child health systems and their partners to reduce toxic stress and build community resilience to improve child health outcomes. RESULTS: Key informants indicated the intentional approach to ACEs and toxic stress through continuous quality improvement (data-driven decisions and program development, partners testing and adapting to changes to their needs, and iterative development and testing) which provides a mechanism by which social determinants or a population health approach could be introduced to physicians and community partners as part of a larger effort to build community resilience. Structured interviews also reveal a need for a framework that provides guidance, structure, and support for child health systems and community partners to develop collective goals, shared work plans, and a means for data-sharing to reinforce the components that will contribute to community resilience. CONCLUSIONS: Key informant interviews and focus group dialogues revealed a deep understanding of the factors related to toxic stress and ACEs. Respondents endorsed the BCR approach as a means to explore capacity issues, reduce fragmented health care delivery, and facilitate integrated systems across partners in efforts to build community resilience. Current financing models are seen as a potential barrier, because they often do not support restructured roles, partnership development, and the work to sustain upstream efforts to address toxic stress and community resilience.
Authors: Samantha L Matlin; Robey B Champine; Michael J Strambler; Caitlin O'Brien; Erin Hoffman; Melissa Whitson; Laurie Kolka; Jacob Kraemer Tebes Journal: Am J Community Psychol Date: 2019-09-04
Authors: Donte L Bernard; Casey D Calhoun; Devin E Banks; Colleen A Halliday; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Carla K Danielson Journal: J Child Adolesc Trauma Date: 2020-08-11
Authors: Adam Hege; Erin Bouldin; Manan Roy; Maggie Bennett; Peyton Attaway; Kellie Reed-Ashcraft Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 3.390