A clean Congressional wash toward a best match
Speculation that federally positioned politicians, Congressional representatives, serve themselves more than their states has existed longer than any representative in Congress. This speculation deserves attention and response.
Fortunately, health is a priority to every individual, and healthcare is a highly regulated, increasingly measured service. Notably, 4 of the top 7 lobbyist groups in politics are also in the healthcare industry: the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, PhRMA and Blue Cross [1].
Given the data-driven ring toss that politicians either observe or participate in, on a regular basis, there may be games played in which state representation gets lost. Because speculation over state and personal priorities persists, state representation assessments could begin with health data.
Assisting Congress in cleaning up its act first requires a clean wash. Remove the mismatched debris as best possible, and help Congress keep their state health needs in hand. We can provide a clean wash with data analytics support.
To keep it simple, and on point, health data could be matched with political work for a transparent, clear nonpartisan assessment. This information could be housed and available to the public without opinion or bias.
An analysis of a politician’s work alongside healthcare, and how this work has represented the individuals who requested the politician’s presence in DC, should include:
*Specific data and clear application of the data. Outcome data could be used to assess a political starting point, and process data could be used to assess a politician’s efforts in addressing the starting point. Determine a relative time point if outcome data is to be applied and attributed to a politician; this is feasible, given the decades-long political fiefdoms masqueraded as our country’s needed experience. At some point, the federal politicians in it for decades share responsibility for their state’s current health outcomes.
*Specific sources and methodology, and these sources should be relevant to the year. Outdated metrics are not as indicative of a current public’s health in any state, even from ten years ago [2]. This is especially true when factoring census changes. Encourage nonprofits and health reports to collaborate on state health analytics, as well. If the U.S. News & World Report utilizes CDC data from a general, one time survey [3], Becker’s uses a private company Sharecare [4], the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) uses America’s Health Rankings [5] and the National Association of City and County Health Officials (NACCHO) uses County Health Rankings & Roadmaps (CHR&R) [6,7], what is the actual message to the public? Communicate that clear interpretation, without manipulation, of the data matters. Communicate that health colleagues are in sync. Get better, smarter and clearer about sources and methodology for state health data and state comparisons.
*Consider ownership and creation of a robust report. Consider source and methodology ownership. If state health comparisons had strong methodology and sources, analytics would be available on a regular basis. In fact, a well-funded, strong data team could provide data within specific timeframes, such as the previous 12 months. Decide on ownership, and decide on source and methodology preference. Consider where current state health methodology models align and diverge. As America’s Health Ranking utilizes some components of the CHR&R, yet the models differ [8,9], how could this affect and drive better unification of methodology design? Standardized, clear sources and methodology for state health data not only provide analytics for politician performance, they provide a new starting point and foundation to direct political attention. Attention to best model consensus also reciprocates the improvement: CHR&R could take standardization, additions or modifications back to counties for data requirement changes. America’s Health Ranking could also provide changes to their consumers. And a new, robust source would work in tandem as it seeks to truly compare state health.
*Determine process metrics. Voting presence when voting pertains to healthcare, legislation decisiveness, constituent and state health meeting presence, responsiveness, constituent data aggregation (especially around constituent preferences with health legislation), time on education and legislation messaging to constituents, time or activities devoted to presentation and constituent education on healthcare economics, time or activities devoted to listening and absorption of healthcare economics and system education, Congressional aide labor allocation are several potential metrics.
*Determine accompanying data. Report time spent with, and financial donations from, health lobbyists alongside the health outcome and political process data. Report time spent with, and financial donations from health industries and related industries (agriculture, energy, transportation). Report on assets and investments as best possible. Report on federal Congressional time spent abroad, and the reasons for the time spent abroad. Report on donations with foreign ties, and how this money has impacted healthcare decisions.
*Consider a metric for match. How much does the politician’s efforts match their constituents current state health needs as well as constituents preferences? Given the history and nature of Congressional attention to match, this metric may even support Congressional performance improvement.
*Report out the information factually, ask for repeated messaging in state and local partnerships, and hire those who prioritize nonpartisan work.
Assisting Congress in cleaning up its act first requires a clean wash. Remove the mismatched debris as best possible, and help Congress keep their state health needs in hand. We can provide a clean wash with data analytics support, and we can set Congressional expectations for a best match.
2.https://www.leapfroggroup.org/news-events/national-state-state-ranking-hospital-safety-score
3.https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/health-care/public-health
5.https://www.astho.org/americashealthrankings/
6.https://www.naccho.org/blog/articles/2018-county-health-rankings-report
8.https://www.americashealthrankings.org/about/methodology/introduction
9.https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/
Comments
Post a Comment