Revising the National Ambient Air Quality Standards: The integration of science and policy

Under the Clean Air Act, Congress granted discretionary decision making authority to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This discretionary authority involves setting standards to protect the public's health with an "adequate margin of safety" based on current scientific knowledge. The Administrator of the EPA is usually not a scientist, and for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the Administrator faced the task of revising a standard when several scientific factors were ambiguous. These factors included: (1) no identifiable threshold below which health effects are not manifested, (2) no biological basis to explain the reported associations between particulate matter and adverse health effects, and (3) no consensus among the members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) as to what an appropriate PM indicator, averaging period, or value would be for the revised standard. ^ This project recommends and demonstrates a tool, integrated assessment (IA), to aid the Administrator in making a public health policy decision in the face of ambiguous scientific factors. IA is an interdisciplinary approach to decision making that has been used to deal with complex issues involving many uncertainties, particularly climate change analyses. Two IA approaches are presented; a rough set analysis by which the expertise of CASAC members can be better utilized, and a flag model for incorporating the views of stakeholders into the standard setting process. ^ The rough set analysis can describe minimal and maximal conditions about the current science pertaining to PM and health effects. Similarly, a flag model can evaluate agreement or lack of agreement by various stakeholder groups to the proposed standard in the PM review process. ^ The use of these IA tools will enable the Administrator to (1) complete the NAAQS review in a manner that is in closer compliance with the Clean Air Act, (2) expand the input from CASAC, (3) take into consideration the views of the stakeholders, and (4) retain discretionary decision making authority. ^

A study of the determinants of the utilization of preventive health care service among Chicanos

This study examines the individual and health care system determinants of two types of preventive health care practice behaviors, having a routine physical exam or a preventive dental exam, in the past year among Chicanos in the Southwestern United States. The study utilizes the Health System Model, developed by Aday and Andersen in 1974, to analyze the relative effect of education, income and occupation on the use of discretionary health care, controlling for other individual and health care system determinants.^ The study is based on a sample of 4,111 Mexican origin adults, drawn from the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HHANES). This sample is representative of Mexican American residing in the Southwestern United States.^ The study tests the hypothesis that education is the most important social class predictor of preventive health care practice behavior. The fully elaborated model tests the hypothesis that individual determinants alone are insufficient to explain the use of preventive health care services among Chicanos.^ The study found that education and income are statistically significant social class indicators only as it relates to having a preventive dental exam. Education is not the most important social class predictor of either preventive health care practice behavior. Health care system determinants are key predictors of both behaviors. Need, as measured by self-perceived health status of teeth and gender, is as important a determinant as having dental insurance coverage as it relates to having a preventive dental exam. Implications for health programs to effectively reach Chicano target groups and remove access barriers to their use of discretionary health care services are discussed. ^

THE EFFECTS OF COST-SHARING ON USE OF SERVICES AND CONSUMER CHARACTERISTICS IN A STATE'S CRIPPLED CHILDREN'S DIVISION

The present study analyzed some of the effects of imposing a cost-sharing requirement on users of a state's health service program. The study population consisted of people who were in diagnosed medical need and included, but was not limited to, people in financial need.^ The purpose of the study was to determine if the cost-sharing requirement had any detrimental effects on the service population. Changes in the characteristics of service consumers and in utilization patterns were analyzed using time-series techniques and pre-post policy comparisons.^ The study hypotheses stated that the distribution of service provided, diagnoses serviced, and consumer income levels would change following the cost-sharing policy.^ Analysis of data revealed that neither the characteristics of service users (income, race, sex, etc.) nor services provided by the program changed significantly following the policy. The results were explainable in part by the fact that all of the program participants were in diagnosed medical need. Therefore, their use of "discretionary" or "less necessary" services was limited.^ The study's findings supported the work of Joseph Newhouse, Charles Phelps, and others who have contended that necessary service use would not be detrimentally affected by reasonable cost-sharing provisions. These contentions raise the prospect of incorporating cost-sharing into programs such as Medicaid, which, at this writing, do not demand any consumer payment for services.^ The study concluded with a discussion of the cost-containment problem in health services. The efficacy of cost-sharing was considered relative to other financing and reimbursement strategies such as HMO's, self-funding, and reimbursement for less costly services and places of service. ^

The Children’s Bureau’s Role in Promoting Parent Engagement and Family Support: A Brief History and Current Efforts

Over the years, federal child welfare policy has supported parent engagement and family support strategies through various Children’s Bureau funded state formula grant programs, research and demonstration discretionary grants, and technical assistance. This article highlights programs funded by two federal laws, Promoting Safe and Stable Families and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, and Children’s Bureau’s efforts to test innovations and disseminate knowledge about promising and evidence-based practices regarding parent engagement and family support. The article begins with a brief legislative history and then describes several grant programs that are supported by the legislation. The article concludes with lessons learned and a discussion of the new opportunities for system changes through the Title IV-E Waiver Demonstration projects.