Targeting Health Communication Efforts towards Policy Makers

Background: While many health communications professionals have experience communicating information to the general public and media, communicating to policy makers is less common. This is unfortunate as communicating public health information to policy makers is critical to improving health in the U.S. Therefore, there’s a need to share best practices for communicating public health information to policy makers. We know from the literature policy makers are a receptive audience for communicating health information, however they feel it’s generally difficult to find, and that the policy implications aren’t always clear. Access, time, and expertise have also been identified as barriers. To overcome these barriers, the Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research and Policy (JH CIRP) developed “Preventing Injuries in Maryland: A Resource for State Policy Makers.” Its purpose is to communicate information on policy-relevant injury topics to Maryland lawmakers, applying best practices from the literature, to facilitate evidence-based decision making.

Program background:  To meet the needs of policy makers for easily understood and relevant information, the JH CIRP developed the first (2010) edition of “Preventing Injuries in Maryland: A Resource for State Policy Makers,” 6”x9” spiralbound publication covering information and policy solutions to eight high-priority injury topics. Applying best practices from the communications literature, each topic was condensed to one page and designed to appeal to the audience. For example, all information was bulleted and jargon-free, while the use of photos, tabs, and heavy card stock enhanced its usability and overall attractiveness. The Resource was distributed to lawmakers in the beginning of the 2010 legislative session through both direct mail and email, and a briefing was held before the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee.The publication was also promoted through the University’s government affairs newsletter, the School’s magazine, in a column in Injury Prevention, and in a Baltimore Sun OpEd.

Evaluation Methods and Results:  In May 2010, all MD General Assembly members received a link to an electronic survey designed to assess the Resource’s impact. Almost 30% of the policy makers responded to the electronic survey and of those, almost 40% reported they were aware of the Resource. When asked what recommendations they have, policy makers responded they'd like more personal contact (ie office visits to talk about the Resource; Host an event; Send reminders; and Call before sending). In addition to the survey results, we received a record number of requests for testimony on injury-related bills during the 2010 legislative session. We also saw traffic to the Center’s website peak following distribution, and received several requests from other organizations looking to replicate our efforts in their own states and on other public health topics.  Because of these positive results, 2011 and 2012 versions were created and disseminated.

Conclusions: Our experience shows the Resource can be used as model for communicating to lawmakers about other health topics with strong policy components, both at the local and national level.

Implications for research and/or practice: Policy makers are a critical audience for communications efforts, and this tool is an effective approach.