Sandra E. Pickert1, Ruth Wetta-Hall
1, Susan W. Lear
2, Derek Coppedge
3, Claudia Blackburn
4, Traci Hart
5, Howard Rodenberg
6, Pamela Martin
4, and Doren D. Fredrickson
1. (1) Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, 1010 N. Kansas, Wichita, KS, USA, (2) Pregnancy Crisis Center of Wichita, Inc, 1010 N. West Street, Wichita, KS, USA, (3) HIV/STD/TB Section, Kansas Department of Health & Environment, 1000 SW Jackson, Ste. 210, Topeka, KS, USA, (4) Sedgwick County Health Department, 1900 E. 9th St, Wichita, KS, USA, (5) Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine- Wichita, 1010 N. Kansas, Wichita, KS, USA, (6) Division of Health, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 1000 SW Jackson St. Suite 300, Topeka, KS, USA
Background:
STD rates are high despite significant public funding for disease treatment and control via 3,000 local U.S. public health units. One urban county in Kansas has the largest number of STD cases in the state. Increasingly, the public health system recognizes the need for intersectoral engagement with community resources as a requirement to improve the public's health. In 2004, four Kansas-based agencies partnered to implement the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) STD guidelines in a faith-based abortion-alternative pregnancy resource center (FBAAPRC).
Objective:
To determine whether collaboration between state and county health departments and a FBAAPRC was feasible and might improve STD treatment in Sedgwick County.
Method:
We reviewed epidemiology, program history and first year patient demographics.
Result:
The Pregnancy Crisis Center of Wichita, Inc. is a FBAAPRC with approximately equal numbers of annual client encounters as the nearby local public STD Clinic, and has many high risk STD clients. Contractual guidelines and expectations were established. CDC STD diagnosis and treatment protocols were provided by the local and state health departments. Using principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR) and a logic model approach, the partners developed a process evaluation to track service delivery effectiveness and a research protocol to assess program impact and outcomes. Evaluation strategies included: 1) empowering FBAAPRC staff to own the evaluation process, 2) designing, constructing and implementing an evaluation database which collected data directly from the clinical service delivery process, and 3) monthly report generation to track program goals and associate value with complete data collection. After 6 months of operation 270 encounters served 254 unique patients at the FBAAPRC using CDC algorithms.
Conclusion:
STD treatment at a FBAAPRC was demonstrated as feasible.
Implications:
In general CBPR resulted in a win-win situation for program partners. Recommendations for sites contemplating similar affiliations and community based partnerships are offered.