Charles H. Bruner, Ph.D., and Edward L. Schor, M.D.
Pronounced disparities exist by race and ethnicity in child and adolescent health across a range of health conditions and access to health services. Addressing these child health disparities is particularly important, as childhood and adolescence establish health trajectories that extend throughout a person’s life span.1
These disparities in child health conditions by race and ethnicity also cooccur with other disparities in child outcomes—from educational achievement to child welfare and justice system involvement. This high degree of co-occurrence warrants attention to identifying some common etiology for these disparities.2
Clearly, good child health involves
timely and appropriate (and therefore culturally sensitive) medical care for illness and injury, and screening to detect and treat congenital abnormalities and chronic as well as acute health conditions;
good hygiene, nutrition, and exercise;
stable and nurturing families who provide constant and consistent supervision;
safe environments that do not contain toxic elements;3
social institutions that reinforce healthy lifestyles and behaviors and provide opportunities for growth and development; and
social and psychological supports that foster resiliency and positive identity.4
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 87
E
Clinical Health Care Practice and
Community Building:
Addressing Racial Disparities in Healthy
Child Development
Charles H. Bruner, Ph.D., and Edward L. Schor, M.D.
INTRODUCTION AND SYNOPSIS
Pronounced disparities exist by race and ethnicity in child and adoles-
cent health across a range of health conditions and access to health services.
Addressing these child health disparities is particularly important, as child-
hood and adolescence establish health trajectories that extend throughout
a person’s life span.1
These disparities in child health conditions by race and ethnicity also co-
occur with other disparities in child outcomes—from educational achieve-
ment to child welfare and justice system involvement. This high degree of
co-occurrence warrants attention to identifying some common etiology for
these disparities.2
Clearly, good child health involves
• imely and appropriate (and therefore culturally sensitive) medical
t
care for illness and injury, and screening to detect and treat congen-
ital abnormalities and chronic as well as acute health conditions;
• good hygiene, nutrition, and exercise;
• table and nurturing families who provide constant and consistent
s
supervision;
• safe environments that do not contain toxic elements;3
• ocial institutions that reinforce healthy lifestyles and behaviors
s
and provide opportunities for growth and development; and
• ocial and psychological supports that foster resiliency and positive
s
identity.4
87
OCR for page 87
88 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
Healthy child development that results in educational and social success
similarly involves the same set of points, particularly when social institu-
tions are defined to include schools and their educational components.
These points provide the basis for that common etiology to achieving both
good child health and healthy child development.
In the United States, the first two points on this list generally are con-
sidered to be subject to influence by the health care system through the
primary pediatric practitioner. The last four points generally are considered
to be primarily influenced by the child’s family and community and their
network of supports, with some role from public health on environmental
health conditions, a role for schools for educational development, and a
role for law enforcement for public safety.5
This paper argues that such distinctions and segmentations of respon-
sibility can miss opportunities for addressing child health disparities by
race and ethnicity. In fact, child health practitioners6 and their institutions
can play a contributing role in supporting child health and healthy child
development across all these points. As an example, Figure 3-2 shows that
when the pediatric practitioner’s role is broadly defined and practiced, the
set of healthy child development outcomes that should be at least partially
addressed through well-child care for young children involves identifying
potential concerns on all these points and at least beginning to address
them.7
Defining child health and the responsibilities of the health care com-
munity broadly is particularly important in distressed or vulnerable neigh-
borhoods, where child health outcomes are poorest and where children of
color disproportionately live.8 While there is a limited clinical research base
regarding the effectiveness of more holistic pediatric approaches to healthy
child development, there is also little within current research to indicate an
inability to develop such pediatric practice.9 Further, there are promising
programs with evidence of success in improving health outcomes and reduc-
ing disparities that deserve attention and support, particularly as they con-
nect children and families to other community-building activities. Two such
programs—Help Me Grow in Connecticut and the Eastside Partnership for
Families in Richmond, Virginia—are described as examples of exemplary
efforts to combine clinical practices with community-building ones. Link-
ing clinical practice with community-building efforts offers promise in both
improving child health and children’s healthy development, but requires
explicit attention to the role that child health practitioners should play
in supporting other organizations in leading community-building efforts.
Expanding the knowledge and practice base on effective strategies that
combine clinical and community-building strategies also requires evalua-
tion approaches that extend beyond traditional clinical trials as ways to
attribute causality and measure impact.
OCR for page 87
89
APPENDIX E
DISPARITIES IN HEALTHY CHILD DEVELOPMENT
BY RACE AND ETHNICITY
There is a large, although fragmented, array of data that shows pro-
found disparities in child health outcomes, as well as access to health
services, by race and ethnicity. These disparities start even before birth
and extend through adolescence and into adulthood. That disparities dif-
fer among different racial and ethnic groups depending upon the child
outcome is also an important point in understanding the origins and deter-
minants of disparity. Figure 3-1 provides prevalence data on several child
and adolescent health measures, broken out for the three largest racial and
ethnic groupings in America—white non-Hispanic, African American, and
Hispanic (see Table E-1 for a more extensive list of child health and other
outcomes by these population groups). Disparities also exist for Native
American children and, on some measures, for Asian and Pacific Islander
children, but these are not shown in this figure. Figure 3-1 further provides
prevalence data on measures of educational and social development and on
family factors and characteristics.
As Figure 3-1 indicates, there are consistent and marked disparities
in child health outcomes and access to child health services, with African
American children faring far worse than white, non-Hispanic children on
almost every measure. With the exception of birth outcomes and child and
adolescent mortality, Hispanic children also fare much worse on most mea-
sures than white, non-Hispanic children.10 As has been frequently noted,
the African American infant mortality rate is equivalent to the rates in many
developing countries. Most other child health indicators among African
American and Hispanic children show similar degrees of disparity when
compared with White, non-Hispanic children.
Table E-1 shows that these child health disparities are similar in size to
those found for educational and social outcomes. In other words, dispari-
ties related to healthy child development and school success are equally
profound to those related to specific health conditions. Finally, the family
and community factors for African American and Hispanic children are
very different from those for white, non-Hispanic children. In respect to
wealth (and therefore the ability to invest in one’s future) and geographic
location, the differences are even more pronounced across race and ethnic-
ity than for most of the health and healthy development outcomes experi-
enced by children. In 2000, for instance, median household net worth for
white non-Hispanic households was $79,400, compared with $7,500 for
African American and $9,750 for Hispanic households—a 10-fold differ-
ence, much greater than when annual income is compared. (See Table E-1
for more information.)11
Overall, this collection of data points to the importance of looking
OCR for page 87
TABLE E-1 Child Health Disparities in Context: Selected Indicators of Child Health, Healthy Development, and
90
Family and Community
Child Health Indicators White NH Black NH Hispanic Source
Infant mortality (1,000 live births) 5.7 13.8 5.6 A
Low birth weight 7.2% 13.4% 6.8% A
Elevated blood-lead levels 2.6% 4.3% 3.1% B
Current asthma prevalence (under 18) 8.0% 13.0% 8.6% C
New AIDS cases 13–17/100,000 .1 4.0 .5 D
Child (1–14) death rate/100,000 19 29 18 A
Teen death (15–19) rate/100,000 63 81 64 A
6–11 Overweight 11.8% 19.5% 23.7% E
19–29 Overweight 12.7% 23.6% 23.4% E
Child health indicators
No health insurance coverage 0–17 6.4% 6.9% 19.5% D
No reported specific source of care 0–17 3.3% 5.8% 24.1% D
Late/no entry into prenatal care 11.0% 24.1% 23.5% D
No dental visit (2–17) 41.4% 63.2% 63.3% D
Immunizations not complete (19–35 mo) 16.7% 25.5% 21.3% D
Asthma hospital admissions (0–4)/100,000 15.3 120.0 54.0 D
Hospital admin ped. gastrointes. (0–17)/100,000 81.7 84.1 108.9 D
Healthy Child Development Indicators/Education
Below basic 4th-grade reading proficiency 22% 54% 50% F
Below basic 8th-grade math proficiency 18% 53% 45% F
15–24 dropout rates 6.0% 10.4% 22.4% G
Noncompletion of high school 24.1% 48.8% 46.8% H
OCR for page 87
Healthy Child Development—Other
Youth (16–19) not in school or working 6% 12% 12% A
Foster care placement (0–17)/1,000 4.9 15.8 6.5 I
Males (20–24) in state/federal prison/1,000 9.5 63.4 24.9 J
Family and Community Indicators
Children in poverty 11% 35% 29% A
No parent employed year-round 27% 51% 39% A
Children in single-parent families 23% 65% 36% A
Teen (15–19) birth rate/1,000 females 2.6% 6.3% 8.3% A
Living in high-risk neighborhood 1.7% 20.3% 25.3% K
Median household net worth $74,900 $7,500 $9,750 L
Child Population
2000 population 44,027,087 10,880,696 12,342,259
Percentage of total child population 60.9% 15.1% 17.1%
Projected 2020 population 42,459,109 12,392,102 18,923,344
Percentage of total 52.9% 15.4% 23.6%
SOURCES:
A. Annie E. Casey Foundation. 2007. 2007 kids count data book: State profiles of child well-being. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey
Foundation.
B. Centers for Disease Control. 2005. Blood lead levels—United States, 1999-2002. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 54(20):513-516.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/ mmwrhtml/mm5420a.htm.
C. Centers for Disease Control. 2006. National Health Interiew Surey data—200 data. Table 4-1. http://www.cdc.gov/asthma/nhis/default.
htm.
9
OCR for page 87
TABLE E-1 Continued
92
D. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2006. National Health Care Disparities Report. Appendix D: Data Tables. http://www.ahrq.
gov/qual/nhdr06/index.html#MCH.
E. Weight Awareness. 2007. Ethnicities and childhood oerweight and obesity problems. http:/www.weightawareness.com/topics/doc.
xml?doc_id=1179&am.
F. National Center for Education Statistics. 2007. National Assessment of Educational Progress scores—2007. http://nationsreportcard.gov.
G. National Center for Education Statistics. 2005. Status dropout rates for –2 year-olds, October 200. http://nces.
ed.gov/pubs2007/dropout05.
H. Urban Institute. 2004. Who graduates: Who doesn’t. http://www.urban.org/Uploaded PDF/410934__WhoGraduates.pdf.
I. Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System. 2004–2005. Prealence data by race. http://www.acf.gov/programs/cb/stats__
research/afcars/tar/report13.htm. This prevalence data was divided by census data on the number of children of different ethnicities to come up
with percentages.
J. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2005. Prisoners in 200. http://ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p05.pdf.
K. Bruner, C., M. Wright, and S. Tirmizi. 2007. Village building and school readiness: Closing opportunity gaps in a dierse society. Des Moines,
IA: State Early Childhood Policy Technical Assistance Network.
L.
L. Orzechowski, S., and P. Sepielli. 2003. Net worth and asset ownership of households: 998 and 2000. Current population reports. Washington,
DC: U.S. Census. Pp. 70-88.
OCR for page 87
9
APPENDIX E
for underlying causal underpinnings for disparities that, for child health
outcomes, extends beyond health insurance coverage and clinical care. The
size of the disparities on health and healthy development measures can-
not be attributed to health coverage alone. This involves exploring family,
social institution, and community factors. The specific issue of geography,
or place, is discussed in the next section of this paper.
PLACE AS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN
CHILD HEALTH DISPARITIES
The bank robber Willie Sutton is quoted as saying that he robbed banks
because that was where the money was. Similarly, improving child health
and reducing health disparities by race and ethnicity involve strategies that
are delivered at the community level, where families can go to local facilities
for their children’s health needs. When children are very young, family time
spent together and associations are much more likely to be geographically
bound to a physical neighborhood. Research findings on neighborhood
effects on child and family outcomes independent of individual child and
family characteristics are mixed.12 However, it is clear that place matters in
developing strategies to reduce health disparities, if only because children
of color, and particularly children of color with other economic and social
factors that can contribute to poor health outcomes, disproportionately
reside in certain neighborhoods and communities.
This is very clear from an analysis of 2000 census data of all 65,000
census tracts in the United States on 10 factors associated with their “child-
raising vulnerability.”13 The 10 factors available from the census data were
selected to provide indicators related to education, social structure, employ-
ment, and wealth. Each tract was categorized according to the number of
factors upon which its data showed a high degree of vulnerability (one stan-
dard deviation or more from the mean). Figure 3-3 provides information
that shows differences across census tracts with the presence of different
numbers of vulnerability factors.
As Figure 3-3 shows, with the exception of wage income, the difference
between census tracts with no risk factors and those with six or more risk
factors are profound, with rates from two-and-one-quarter to nine times
greater in the high-vulnerability tracts. The experience of children growing
up in these high-vulnerability tracts is almost certainly very different than
the experience of children growing up in those with little or no vulnerabil-
ity. Except for the South, these high-vulnerability tracts are concentrated in
metropolitan, largely inner-city, neighborhoods, with the highest concentra-
tions of these in the Northeast.
While pointing to the importance of place-based approaches to improv-
ing child health and healthy child development, particularly important for
OCR for page 87
9 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
this report is the fact that these high vulnerability census tracts also are
very disproportionately populated by persons of color. Table E-2 shows
the racial and ethnic composition for census tracts with different numbers
of vulnerability factors.
As Table E-2 indicates, while 83.2 percent of the persons residing in
tracts with no vulnerability factors are white, non-Hispanic, only 17.6 per-
cent of the persons residing in tracts with six or more vulnerability factors
are white, non-Hispanic. As a percentage of their overall population in the
United States, only 1.7 percent of white, non-Hispanics in the country live
in the highest vulnerability census tracts (six or more vulnerability factors),
while 20.3 percent of blacks and 25.3 percent of Hispanics live in those
tracts. Only 7.7 percent of white, non-Hispanics live in census tracts with
three or more vulnerability factors, while 46.4 percent of blacks and 50.3
percent of Hispanics live in those neighborhoods.
In short, successful efforts to reduce child health and other disparities
by race and ethnicity will have to make substantial gains within these high-
vulnerability census tracts, simply due to the very substantial percentage of
the child population of color that resides in those tracts.
In addition, however, available evidence also shows that the health and
healthy development child outcomes are the poorest for both African Amer-
ican and Hispanic children who live within these census tracts.14 Developing
successful efforts in these tracts and neighborhoods likely requires consid-
erable attention to addressing environmental and neighborhood,15 as well
as individual and family, conditions that exist there, which also have been
referred to as “toxic stress” that harms brain development in children.16
Neighborhood conditions include physical indicators such as levels of safety
and exposure to environmental toxins, but also role models and social ties
and connections that look out for children. Individual and family condi-
tions include economic and educational conditions, but also levels of stress
and child nurturing patterns. Conceptually, these factors interact as well, as
neighborhood conditions contribute to or mitigate against family stress and
provide or fail to provide nurturing activities and modeling for parents.
TOWARD A THEORY OF CHANGE IN ADDRESSING
CHILD HEALTH DISPARITIES
The size and consistency of the disparities shown in Figure 3-1 suggest
that there are at least some common underlying elements that contribute to
and will need to be addressed in order to reduce or eliminate child health
and healthy development disparities. The information in Table E-2 and
Figure 3-3 suggests that neighborhood-based, as well as individual-based,
strategies may need to be developed to address these disparities, at least in
high-child vulnerability neighborhoods.
OCR for page 87
TABLE E-2 Racial Composition of Census Tracts by Child-Raising Vulnerability Status
All No 1–2 3–5 6–10
Census Vulnerability Vulnerability Vulnerability Vulnerability
Racial Composition Tracts Factors Factors Factors Factors
% White non-Hispanic 69.8 83.2 67.0 37.4 17.6
% Black 12.5 6.2 13.4 28.2 38.0
% Asian 4.1 3.7 5.1 4.4 3.4
% Hispanic 12.5 6.1 13.3 28.1 39.4
% Am. Indian/Native Alaskan 0.8 0.5 0.9 1.4 1.2
% Native Hawaiian and other PI 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
% Other 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2
Total 100 100 100 100 100
Proportion of race in tract
% White non-Hispanic 100 69.6 22.7 6.0 1.7
% Black 100 29.1 25.2 25.4 20.3
% Asian 100 52.6 29.7 12.3 5.5
% Hispanic 100 28.6 25.0 25.0 25.3
% Am. Indian/Native Alaskan 100 40.3 27.6 21.0 11.1
% Native Hawaiian and other PI 100 50.6 29.9 13.4 6.1
% Other 100 47.6 26.6 15.4 10.4
SOURCE: Census data, 2000.
9
OCR for page 87
96 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
Increasingly, initiatives designed to produce community-level changes
in child and family outcomes have adopted a “theory of change” approach
to evaluation.17 The purpose of applying a theory of change is to identify
assumptions that underlie the belief that the strategies developed will lead
to producing community-level changes in the desired child and family
outcomes. An evaluation design can then be developed to test the different
assumptions upon which the strategies are based.
As stated in the introduction, good child health and healthy child
development involves
• imely and appropriate (and therefore culturally sensitive) medical
t
care for illness and injury and screening to detect and treat congeni-
tal abnormalities and chronic as well as acute health conditions;
• good hygiene, nutrition, and exercise;
• table and nurturing families who provide constant and consistent
s
supervision;
• safe environments that do not contain toxic elements;
• ocial institutions that reinforce healthy lifestyles and behaviors
s
and provide opportunities for growth and development; and
• ocial and psychological supports that foster resiliency and positive
s
identity.
These points can form the basis for a theory of change, as everything on
this list is malleable to some degree.18 Clearly, most children receive most
of what they need most of the time to produce good, if not optimal, health
and healthy development outcomes. The issue is to identify where children
are not receiving what they need and then develop strategies to ensure they
receive it. Box E-1 provides the assumptions for such a theory of change to
address these disparities.
Clearly, there is a research as well as a theoretical (and common sense)
base for each of the assumptions in this theory of change. There is substan-
tial research on assumptions one and two that show there are a set of inter-
related underlying factors beyond the child’s own constitution and genetic
make-up that contribute to good child health and healthy development.
These extend from clinical research on the impact of medical interventions,
to anthropological and sociological research on the role of the family in
child development, to resiliency and risk and protective factor research on
the importance of social institutions and social and psychological supports
to healthy development.19 Further, all these factors are malleable to some
extent.
There also is substantial evidence that while child health insurance cov-
erage and the provision of clinical pediatric services play a role in improving
child health and reducing health disparities, social and environmental fac-
OCR for page 87
97
APPENDIX E
BOX E-1
Theory of Change Set of Testable Assumptions for
Strengthening Pediatric Practices to Reduce Disparities in
Healthy Child Development
1. Pronounced, but malleable, disparities in child health exist by race/ethnicity,
which correspond with similar pronounced disparities in educational achieve-
ment, justice system involvement, and income and wealth.
2. These disparities are not separate and distinct, but are interconnected, requir-
ing strategies for addressing them that need to recognize and address some
of their common underlying causes.
3. Because it is almost universally used by young children, child health care
practice offers an important entry point that can be used to identify and begin
to address these underlying causes.
4. This requires a more holistic and culturally congruent approach to primary,
preventive, and developmental pediatric care than is currently in practice from
a clinical perspective, coupled with effective referrals to other services and
supports at the community level that contribute to community building.
5. Developing such strategies is particularly important in distressed neighbor-
hoods, where children of color disproportionately reside and where environ-
mental factors most threaten child health and development, with actions taken
to increase the social capital and reduce the environmental risk within those
neighborhoods.
6. The result of developing such strategies will be to significantly improve both
specific measures of child health and to improve broader measures of healthy
child development.
tors weigh much more heavily in producing current disparities.20 Further,
although often not considered as an objective or goal (i.e., the dependent
variable in a regression equation), there is at least case study evidence that
child health insurance coverage and clinical pediatric services can play a
role in improving healthy child development and educational and social
outcomes as well as specific health outcomes.21
On the third assumption, which is the lynchpin assumption to interven-
tions that involve clinical practice changes, survey research shows that the
pediatric practitioner is often the only professional who sees children and
their families and is also in a position to assess health and development.
As Figure E-1 shows, nearly 90 percent of all young children are seen by a
primary care practitioner annually, but fewer than one-third are in any form
of formal child care or preschool arrangement. Additionally, there is some
research that families do listen to what pediatric practitioners recommend
and that anticipatory guidance can affect family practices both on health-
OCR for page 87
02 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
brochures describing the program and prescription pads for physicians to
make referrals to Help Me Grow care coordinators, when warranted. Criti-
cally important, Help Me Grow provides an avenue for practitioners to do
something when a potential need is identified.
Help Me Grow Care Coordinators
The second core component of Help Me Grow is the care coordinator,
who follows up on practitioner referrals or direct family contacts made
upon the practitioner’s recommendation. Care coordinators talk by phone
with parents to further determine child and parental concerns and needs,
and then draw upon a continuously developing database of community pro-
viders to match parents with services they may need. The federal Individu-
als with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and its early intervention (Part
C) program represents one important referral and connection, but many
children who may not be eligible for Part C because of age or identified
concerns still benefit from developmental health services. On average, care
coordinators make seven to eight calls following contact with the practi-
tioner and the family in finding a service match and scheduling a visit or
meeting (the amount of time in locating appropriate services is one reason
that pediatric practitioners themselves do not generally do this follow-up
work outside their established connections with specialists within the medi-
cal community). While referrals may be made for additional professional
services, many concerns relate to parenting education and support services,
including peer support and help. Help Me Grow has found that, in most
instances, there are services that parents can access that can provide real
help, but finding them for an individual family takes initiative and time.
The care coordinators also play the important role of providing information
back to the pediatric practitioner on the services that have been matched (so
practitioners can follow-up on the next pediatric visit), and conducting fol-
low-up calls with families and programs to ensure they have actually made
connections. The care coordinator’s work extends beyond simply finding a
referral source to scheduling a visit and following up on that visit.
Child Deelopment Community Liaisons
The third core component of Help Me Grow is the child develop-
ment community liaison, who works closely with the care coordinators
in identifying and matching community services. Liaisons work to con-
tinuously build the comprehensive community resources database that
care coordinators use in their work; they also serve as consultants to
the care coordinators on specific cases, in researching for resources that
can address specific needs. In addition, the liaisons are on-the-ground net -
OCR for page 87
0
APPENDIX E
workers across the service-providing community, hosting regular break-
fasts or other meetings for community providers to receive guidance and
information on selected developmental issues, broaden the overall referral
system, and strengthen the networking and relationships across the service
community.
Schematically, the Help Me Grow model is shown in Figure 3-5. Help
Me Grow also has an evaluation and continuous learning component, one
that is considered fundamental to its success.
Initial findings from Help Me Grow have been the subject of a special
supplement of the Journal of Deelopmental & Behaioral Pediatrics, and
these results tend to confirm the validity of assumptions three and four.37
Help Me Grow has increased both the identification of young children with
developmental problems and their connections to community resources and
supports. It has increased child health care providers’ understanding and
use of other professional services such as Part C and diagnoses and follow-
up clinical services for specific mental and developmental health conditions,
with at least one follow-up visit achieved for more than 90 percent of all
children, according to the most recent report.38 In addition, it has created a
bridge for addressing a variety of more general parental issues and concerns
that can affect children’s healthy development. Approximately one-quarter
of the referrals to care coordinators relate to issues of parenting stress, iso-
lation, or lack of parenting knowledge, or to issues of child discipline and
behavior. Approximately the same percentage of follow-up services young
children and their families secure through Help Me Grow involve parent-
ing education, parent support groups, and other community programs for
parents and their children. Many of the connections Help Me Grow makes
are with programs that do not charge fees and involve nonprofessional
resources that represent social institutional contacts, reinforcing healthy
lifestyles and fostering both child and parental resiliency. Help Me Grow
also makes cultural and language connections when locating community
resources that families and their young children will feel comfortable with
and validated by. It is publicly funded through the state of Connecticut.
East End Partnerships with Families
The East End Partnership with Families in Richmond, Virginia, is
another approach to improving children’s healthy development, with the
Vernon J. Harris Community Center serving as an anchor partner. The
Vernon J. Harris Community Center serves as a safety net provider in offer-
ing high-quality medical services to children and families who otherwise
could not afford such care. At the same time, the center takes a “whole
child and whole family” approach to supporting health, recognizing that
ensuring good health involves meeting a range of family needs—including
OCR for page 87
0 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
such varied needs as securing housing or rent assistance, supporting rela-
tives providing child care, and providing summer day camp opportunities
for youth.
The East End Partnership includes 10 community partner organizations
that have come to see their role as creating resources and opportunities
that children and their families need for their health and development. The
Parent Resource Network is a critical partner, a parent-led organization
committed to ensuring that family voices in design and family involvement
in implementation is a core aspect of program development.
Central to the East End Partnership with Families is a comprehensive
assessment and client-tracking system that involves common intake and
referral at the Vernon J. Harris Community Center, coupled with care
coordination for the most vulnerable families that helps them to navigate
the array of community agencies they deal with that are designed to provide
them with needed services.
The comprehensive assessment not only identifies needs but also helps
ensure that families know about and can become involved in a wide range
of services, including
• edical care, dental services, and community outreach and assess-
m
ment services through the Vernon J. Harris Health Center;
• parent resource network, including advocacy training and sup-
a
port, peer networking, and a variety of support groups, including
a kinship care support group, a single parents support group, and
a teen “girl talk” group;
• hild guidance services, involving community-based mental health,
c
school-based mental health, and preventive mental health services;
and
• variety of community programs developed through the partner-
a
ship’s work and partner leadership, based upon needs identified by
parents and youth and specific opportunities for securing needed
resources identified by the partnership and its members, including
such activities as youth drug abuse counseling, teen grief counsel-
ing, “raising a reader” programming, obesity prevention program-
ming, and male mentoring and fatherhood programming.
The starting point for the connection with families is the Vernon J.
Harris Health Center and its reputation and standing in the community as
a high-quality and culturally responsive center for providing needed health
services. There are many community health centers with such reputations
in their communities, and many have also developed additional services
and community connections similar to those created in Richmond through
the East End Partnership with Families. They have done so because their
OCR for page 87
0
APPENDIX E
close connections to the children and families they serve have brought such
needs and opportunities to their attention, and they have supported resident
leaders to advocate for needed services.
The Vernon J. Harris Health Center and the East End Partnership with
Families is highlighted as an exemplary but by no means unique effort
among community health centers. It is mature and sophisticated, continu-
ously looking for ways to expand the services available to members of its
community, often through forging ties and partnerships within a predomi-
nantly minority community within a larger political jurisdiction.
As a case in point, the East End Partnership with Families provides sub-
stantial evidence for the validity of the fifth assumption—the importance of
working within distressed communities—as it has been successful in build-
ing social capital, fostering resiliency, and creating a more favorable overall
environment for healthy child development within the community.
The growth of the East End Partnership with Families has not been by
detailed blueprint; its evolution has been both organic and entrepreneurial.
The partnership’s successes can be seen in its ability to identify needs and
secure resources, but that success truly rests on the infrastructure, support,
and leadership it provides. Creating a critical mass of programs, activities,
and opportunities that are sufficiently diverse to attract and engage different
constituencies may be more important than the provision of specific, dis-
crete professional services (however much they can be tied to clinical need)
to improving healthy child development in these neighborhoods.39
This ability to activate and motivate its community relates to assump-
tions, or testable propositions, under the theory of change. While the Ver-
non J. Harris Community Center and East End Partnership with Families
exist in various degrees throughout the country, using this as a model for
reducing disparities assumes that there are intentional activities and efforts
that can replicate the evolution of the East End Partnership with Families
and its level of activity and community engagement. At a minimum, this
may involve investing in champions rather than programs. It also assumes
that a critical mass of activity will, in fact, change community social capital
and community resiliency to produce community improvements related
to healthy child development that are more than the sum of individual
program parts. At a minimum, testing this assumption requires research
methodologies that extend beyond randomized controlled trials, particu-
larly as assignment to a treatment or control group would violate the fun-
damental, inclusive approach being taken to producing changes in healthy
child development.
OCR for page 87
06 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
CONCLUSION, NEXT STEPS, AND
APPROPRIATE METHODOLOGIES
This paper has sought to make the case for changed pediatric clinical
practices—particularly around well-child care—to help address disparities
in child health and healthy child development by race and ethnicity. The
profound disparities in both child health and healthy child development
by race and ethnicity cannot be expected to simply disappear without
concerted and intentional efforts to address them. They have proved to be
persistent in American society and require significant changes in order to
address them effectively.
This paper also has asserted that the clinical health community can play
an essential, but by no means total or independent, role in reducing these
disparities. This clinical role requires both changing clinical health practices
(to be more holistic and developmental) and changing ways that clinical
practices connect to community (particularly to make effective referrals of
patients to community resources and supports).
As case illustrations, the Help Me Grow and East End Partnership with
Families examples provide illustrations of organic and holistic approaches
to improving healthy child development that start with clinical practice but
extend into their communities to produce improvements in healthy child
development.
Clearly, there is not a current research base that provides definitive
results for efforts that combine individually focused health strategies with
community-building efforts that strengthen healthy outcomes on a popu-
lation level. There is not an established set of protocols and procedures
to achieve such ends that can guide practitioners. There is not a research
base that has begun to establish the relative size of the effects in reducing
disparities that such combined or coordinated efforts might be expected to
produce. Compared with the amount of funding expended on research on
clinical procedures and drug therapies, the research funding for evaluating
such approaches has been miniscule at best. Yet, achieving good outcomes
for children requires that current clinical care be improved, and that part
of that improvement involves assuring that children and families have ready
accesses to a variety of community support services.
More emphasis needs to be provided for this work, which also involves
developing evaluation approaches that are rigorous, but that involve differ-
ent methodologies than randomized controlled trials for attributing causal-
ity for at least some aspects of the work.40 It requires investing in champions
who are developing such approaches, involving different approaches when
awarding research grants,41 and giving credence to such efforts and their
practitioners within the clinical community. In the end, particularly in the
diffusion of such practices, it involves fiscal and regulatory incentives that
OCR for page 87
07
APPENDIX E
support them, moving toward broader rather than narrower definitions of
what constitutes child health services.42
ENDNOTES
1 Halfon, N., and M. Hochstein. 2002. Life course health development: An integrated
framework for developing health, policy, and research. Milbank Quarterly 80(3):433-
479. Forrest, C., and A. Riley. 2004. Childhood origins of adult health: A basis for life-
course health policy. Health Affairs 23(5):155-164.
2 Family income and socioeconomic status also has strong correlations with a broad variety
of child outcomes and with race and ethnicity. See Haveman, R., and B. Wolfe. 1994.
Succeeding generations: On the effects of inestments in children. New York: Russell
Sage Foundation. There likely is no single etiology to explain all disparities, and there
are substantial variations in different child outcomes by different races and ethnicities,
independent from income and socioeconomic status, that also need to be addressed.
3 This refers to toxic elements in a broad sense, including environmental exposure to toxic
elements (lead paint, chemicals, poor air quality, etc.), exposure to unsafe situations
(violence and crime, poor housing, etc.), and presence of a socially toxic environment
(social disorganization, absence of positive peer and adult activities, etc.). Garbarino, J.
1995. Raising children in a socially toxic enironment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4 In dominant culture, this positive identity often is based on a realistic belief that op-
portunity exists through personal achievement. The disconnect that minorities may face
between that dominant culture belief and their own opportunity (because of institutional
racism and/or cultural clashes in undergirding values and expectations) can be cause for
alienation, anger, and anomie, all to the detriment of health and healthy development.
5 Views in other parts of the world tend to be more holistic and ecological, particularly
within developing countries. The World Health Organization places a very pronounced
role on community building as a tool for improving health. The United States itself has a
very individualistic political culture, with strong underlying assumptions regarding both
personal responsibility and availability of opportunity that tend to view adult outcomes
as the result of adult decisions and not external factors. This has led to both health and
social interventions and policies that focus upon individual change as opposed to com-
munity condition change.
6 The term child health practitioners refers to pediatricians, family practitioners, and pe-
diatric nurse practitioners who provide primary care for children.
7 Schor, E. 2007. The future pediatrician: Promoting children’s health and development.
Journal of Pediatrics Nov:S11-S16.
8 This paper will largely use the term ulnerable neighborhoods to describe those places
where challenges to successfully raising children are greatest. These neighborhoods also
have been referred to as “distressed,” “disinvested,” “poor, tough,” or “poor, immigrant,
and minority” neighborhoods in the field. This paper also will use the term children of
color to refer to all children who are not identified as white, non-Hispanic, although His-
panic is considered in the census as a descriptor of origin or ethnicity and not race—and
many Hispanics select their race as “white.”
9 Horowitz, C., and E. Lawlor. 2007. Community approaches to addressing health dispari-
ties. Paper for the Institute of Medicine’s Roundtable on Racial and Ethnic Health Dis-
parities. See also Best, A., D. Stokols, L. Green, S. Leischow, B. Holmes, and K. Buchholz.
2003. An integrative framework for community partnering to translate theory into effec-
tive health promotion strategy. American Journal of Health Promotion 18(2):168-176.
OCR for page 87
08 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
10 Although entry into early prenatal care is substantially lower in pregnancies among
Hispanic women, both low birth weight rates and infant mortality rates are also lower,
compared even with pregnancies among white, non-Hispanic women. These data are
even more pronounced when controlled for income. A landmark meta-analysis of more
than 10,000 international research studies on effective practices in childbirth concluded
that “social, psychological, and fiscal supports” were more important to healthy birth
outcomes for women without specific medical complications than were clinical visits
during pregnancy (and that doulas and nurse midwives produced better birth outcomes
than obstetricians for these pregnancies, because they spent more time and provided more
social support). Enkin, M., J. Keirse, and I. Chalmers. 1989. A guide to effectie care
in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. While pregnancy is
not necessarily regarded as a medical condition requiring clinical care within Hispanic
communities, it is more likely to be treated as a joyous event that involves intensifica-
tion of attention and support for the woman experiencing pregnancy, such as social and
psychological (and to some extent financial) supports. Research also suggests that these
more positive birth outcomes among Hispanic women are generally for first-generation
immigrants and may not extend to second- and third-generation women whose families
and support systems have been acculturated to other practices and roles regarding preg-
nancy and work.
11 Orzechowski, S., and P. Sepielli. 2003. Net worth and asset ownership of households:
1998 and 2000. Current Population Reports. Washington, DC: U.S. Census. Pp. 70-88.
12 Brooks-Gunn, J., G. Duncan, and L. Aber (eds). 1997. Neighborhood poerty: Volume
I. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Xue, Y., T. Leventhal, J. Brooks-Gunn, and F.
Earls. 2005. Neighborhood residence and mental health problems of 5- to 11-year-olds.
Archies of General Psychiatry 62(5):554-563.
13 Bruner, C., M. Wright, and S. Tirmizi. (2007). Village building and school readiness:
Closing opportunity gaps in a dierse society. Des Moines, IA: State Early Childhood
Policy Technical Assistance Network. Pp. 5-14.
14 Geomapping of vital records statistics and birth outcomes is increasingly common and
shows the spatial concentration of infant mortality, low birth weight, and entry into
prenatal care. Elevated blood lead levels also have been geomapped and have extremely
high correlations to low-income housing areas of pre-1950s housing. Childhood obe-
sity has even been linked to neighborhoods with high poverty concentrations, lack of
access to grocery stores, and absence of safe recreational spaces. The Annie E. Casey
Foundation’s Making Connections Initiative, working in 10 inner-city neighborhoods
across the country, has conducted extensive surveys of residents asking selected ques-
tions regarding child health, one of which is identical to the questions from the national
health survey regarding childhood asthma. In all Making Connections surveys analyzed
(for Denver, Des Moines, Indianapolis, and Oakland), parent-reported asthma prevalence
rates among young children were double those of the state as a whole. Bruner, C., and S.
Tirmizi. 2007. Making connections wae II surey and key findings on children healthy
and prepared for success in school. Des Moines, IA: Child and Family Policy Center.
15 Bruner, C., and S. Tirmizi. 2007. Making connections wae II surey and key findings on
children healthy and prepared for success in school. Des Moines, IA: Child and Family
Policy Center.
16 National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. 2005. Excessie stress disrupts the
architecture of the deeloping brain. Cambridge, MA: Center on the Developing Child
at Harvard University.
OCR for page 87
09
APPENDIX E
17 The Aspen Institute has been a leader in promoting a “theory of change” approach to
evaluating comprehensive, community-building initiatives and has produced three use-
ful volumes on this subject. See Weiss, C. 1995. Nothing as practical as good theory:
Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives. In New
approaches to ealuating community initiaties: Concepts, methods, and contexts, edited
by J. Connell, A. Kubisch, L. Schorr, and C. Weiss. New York: Aspen Institute.
18 Genetic factors and individual constitution also contribute to children’s health and
healthy development but also represent givens, generally not subject to change except
through one of the other items on the list.
19 See endnotes 30–33.
20 One such suggested breakdown of the relative contribution to health is constitution
(10%), medical care (20%), environmental conditions (20%), and personal factors
(50%).
21 Currie, J. 2005. Health disparities and gaps in school readiness. Future of Children
15:1.
22 Hagan, J., J. Shaw, and P. Duncan. 2007. Bright futures: Guidelines for health superi-
sion of infants, children, and adolescents. Elk Grove Village, IL: American Academy of
Pediatrics.
23 Answering these questions requires evaluation methodologies that are both rigorous
and appropriate. A promising framework for evaluating comprehensive, systems change
initiatives that takes into account their complexity and need for multiple evaluation meth-
odologies while involving rigor in seeking to attribute causality is found in Coffman, J.
2007. A framework for ealuating systems initiaties. www.buildinitiative.org (accessed
June 9, 2009).
24 For a particularly poignant example, see Fadiman, A. (1997). The spirit catches you and
you fall down: A Hmong child, her American doctors, and the collision of two cultures.
New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
25 Discussing the underlying effects of racism on child health and healthy development is
well beyond the scope of this paper, but the topic deserves a similar provocative discus-
sion as that applied to achievement disparities in education set out in Perry, T. 2003. Up
from the parched earth: Toward a theory of African American achievement. In Young,
gifted, and black: Promoting high achieement among African-American students, ed-
ited by T. Perry, C. Steele, and A. Hilliard, III. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Pp. 1-108.
There also is some research that stress produced by contact with discrimination has
adverse impacts upon healthy births. Collins, J., R. David, A. Handler, S. Wall, and S.
Andres. 2004. Very low birth weight in African American infants: The role of maternal
exposure to interpersonal racial discrimination. American Journal of Public Health
94(12):2132-2138.
26 Lemann, N. 1994. The myth of community development. New York Times Sunday
Magazine. January 9, Section 6, 27.
27 Jarrett, R. (1999). Successful parenting in high-risk neighborhoods. The Future of Chil-
dren 9(2):45-50.
28 Bruner, C. 2006. Social service systems reform and poor neighborhoods: What we know
and what we need to find out. In Community change: Theories, practice, and eidence,
edited by K. Fulbright-Anderson, and P. Auspos. New York: Aspen Institute Roundtable
on Community Change.
29 Bruner, C. 2006. Village building and school readiness. In Community change: Theories,
practice, and eidence, edited by K. Fulbright-Anderson, and P. Auspos. New York:
Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change. Pp. 5-14.
OCR for page 87
0 FOCUSING ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH
30 Putnam, R. 1993. The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The Ameri-
can Prospect 4 (March 21): 35-42. Putnam, R. 1993. Making democracy work: Ciic
traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31 Bernard, B. 1991. Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school,
and community. Portland, OR: Far West Laboratories. Henderson, N. B. Benard, and
N. Sharp-Light, eds. 1999. Resiliency in action: Practical ideas for oercoming risks and
building strengths in youth, families, and communities. San Diego, CA: Resiliency in
Action Press.
32 Catalano, R., and D. Hawkins. 1996. The social development model: A theory of anti-
social behavior. In Delinquency and crime: Current theories, edited by J. Hawkins. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
33 Benson, P. 2000. All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and
responsible children and adolescents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
34 Guyer, B., S. Ma, H. Grason, K. Frick, A. Perry, and J. McIntosh. (2007). Inestments to
promote children’s health: A systematic literature reiew and economic analysis of inter-
entions in the preschool period. Washington, DC: Partnership for America’s Economic
Success. Bruner, C. 2001. A stitch in time. Washington, DC: Finance Project.
35 The widely cited research on the importance of investing in preschool because of its return
on investment is based upon such multiple gains that cover far more than educational
impacts. In fact, the educational gains alone would not warrant such investments—it is
the social gains (reduced criminal activity, adolescent parenting, etc.) that produce the
high rates of return on such investments. See Bruner, C. 2006. Many happy returns. Des
Moines, IA: State Early Childhood Policy Technical Assistance Network.
36 These are only two of many possible programs, selected for illustrative purposes. The
American Academy of Pediatric’s CATCH program has been working since 1989 to
promote better linkages between practice and the community. See http://www.jhsph.
edu/wchpc/projects/catch.html.
37 Dworkin, P. and J. Bogin, eds. 2006. Help me grow roundtable: Promoting develop-
ment through child health services. Journal of Deelopmental and Behaioral Pediatrics
27:1S.
38 Hughes, M., M. Damboise. 2007. Help me grow: 2007 annual ealuation report. Hart-
ford, CT: Center for Social Research, University of Hartford for the Children’s Trust
Fund.
39 This is one of five plausible “theories of change” for addressing the needs of children
in poor neighborhoods presented more fully in Bruner, C. 2006. Social service systems
reform and poor neighborhoods: What we know and what we need to find out. In Com-
munity change: Theories, practice, and eidence, edited by K. Fulbright-Anderson, and
P. Auspos. New York: Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change.
40 Coffman, J. 2007. A framework for ealuating systems initiaties. Build Initiative. Partici-
patory or empowerment evaluation also has a role in this work, but only if it ultimately
also meets some test of attributing causality. This includes the ability for disproof, includ -
ing disproof of the role of participant-led change as sufficient or necessary for improving
healthy child development outcomes.
41 Polansky, N. 1995 (unpublished). Historical perspectie in ealuatie research. Polanski
relates the story of Fritz Redl, an imaginative and innovative researcher on developing
treatments for disturbed youth. Previously funded by the National Institute of Health,
he sought to apply for additional funding, but “came up against a newly erected wall.
The applicant was now asked not only whom he wanted to treat, but precisely what the
treatment would be, and by what design it would be evaluated so that one could tell
whether it differed for those not so treated. … [Redl needed] funding for a free-wheel-
ing project in which he would try to find ways of approaching heretofore unreachable
OCR for page 87
APPENDIX E
children. But, the grantors—who knew little about the substance of this work but found
great security in the irrefutable logic of design—wanted him to state in advance what
he would learn. Asked Redl, ‘If I already know how to treat these kids, why would I be
asking for support in order to find out?’” Redl’s logic (similar to Einstein’s statement, “If
we knew what we were doing, it wouldn’t be research”) points to the need for multiple
approaches to learning and evaluation. In some instances, and as Polanski points out in
the case of Redl’s work, it may also be that “the patient is his own control.”
42 There is an adage, “If you don’t pay for it, it won’t get done.” This involves funding
streams and reimbursement systems within clinical practice that cover the time and re-
sources needed to provide for effective referrals to and collaborations with community
service providers. Currently, at the federal level the Center for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS) is seeking to restrict the use of targeted case management under Medic-
aid, which has been used for precisely the purposes of linking children with medical and
transmedical services to improve their health discussed in this report. Care coordina-
tion and targeted case management are essential for helping children and their families
develop bridges between clinical services and other supports necessary for their healthy
development and need to be part of a financing system. As another simple illustration,
the Reach Out and Read program has demonstrated a positive effect upon early literacy
and is a low-cost intervention that pediatricians generally value. If the purchase of Reach
Out and Read books was a reimbursable item under Medicaid and private health insur-
ance coverage, it is likely that Reach Out and Read would become a part of routine
practice much more quickly than where book purchasing must rely upon grants or other
contributions.
OCR for page 87