Kpop Radio Stations In Ohio, Giant Skeletons Found, Jobs For 14 Year Olds In Nassau County, Obituaries Sand Springs, Ok, Beauty Therapist License In Dubai, Articles K

3, Elements of a Health Impact Assessment. Rethinking human health impact assessment. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. 2009; Castro et al. Environmental justice implications of reduced reporting requirements of the Toxics Release Inventory Burden Reduction Rule. Box 3-1 provides an example of how screening on a proposal for a residential housing program was conducted. In contrast, independent evaluation can yield unbiased insights about an HIA from the perspectives of stakeholders and decision-makers, can contribute to a more robust external peer review, and can provide rich information regarding the strengths, weaknesses, and most effective methods and approaches in the field. Some lawssuch as NEPA, state environmental-policy acts, and various local zoning ordinancesmay establish protection of health as a requirement or priority. Impact evaluation attempts to judge whether the HIA influenced the decision- making process, that is, whether and to what degree the recommendations were adopted and implemented and how the HIA influenced the decision-making process. The potential for HIA-based information to alter a decision or help a decision-maker discriminate among decision options. The core issues that are commonly addressed are as follows: Some HIA guides recommend using a matrix, such as those shown in Tables 3-2 and 3-3, to characterize effects (Harris et al. Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website. Parry JM, Kemm JR. By examining the various components of the different assessment and planning models, we are able to identify areas for coordination, ways to maximize collaboration, and strategies to further improve community health. Process evaluation can range from a simple self-assessment that is undertaken at the end of an HIA and focuses on a few variables that are relatively simple to describe, track, or measuresuch as the methods used, degree of certainty of predictions, and approach to stakeholder engagementto a more comprehensive case study that seeks to evaluate the HIA process holistically. On the basis of its review of current guidance and practice, the committee recommends that scoping should result in a framework for the HIA and a written project plan that includes the following: The credibility and relevance of HIA to the decision-making process rest on a balanced and complete examination of the health risks, benefits, and tradeoffs presented by the project, policy, program, or plan being assessed. In practice, the categories are rarely used consistently, and a single HIA often encompasses a blend of various approaches to stakeholder engagement and participation, analytic methods, and interactions with the formal decision-making process. Questions that are important from a public-health perspective might include the severity of the health effect, the size and likelihood of the effect, and the potential of the effect to exacerbate health disparities. As a final note, it is important to remember the context in which HIAs are conducted when considering the recommendations phase. DHHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2005; PHAC 2005; Harris et al. ACTION STEP 1: Assemble the Community Team Representation from diverse sectors is key ACTION STEP 2: Develop Team Strategy Decide whether to complete CHANGE as a whole team or divide into subgroups The CH If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance. Careers. Disclaimer. Document No. Evaluation of whether a decision has changed specific health outcomes may often be difficult or impossible because of the complex and multifactorial causal pathways involved in many health outcomes, the length of time from implementation of a decision to observable changes in health indicators, and the lack of suitable comparison groups (Quigley and Taylor 2004; Parry and Kemm 2005).