Placer County Community Health Status Update January 2014 Road To - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Placer County Community Health Status Update January 2014 Road To Success Placer County Community Health Status Update

• All children are born healthy to healthy mothers • No health status disparities among racial/ethnic, gender, MCAH economic and regional groups • A safe and healthy environment for women, children, Goals and their families • Equal access for all women, children, and their families to appropriate and needed care within an integrated and seamless system

How Are We Doing?

Let’s Look at the Data

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Health insurance Prenatal care Doctor visits Dental visits Medi-Cal enrollment Childhood immunizations Acces ess to and Utili lizati ation of Care

How does Placer compare to CA? Access to MUCH WORSE and Utilizati tion LITTLE WORSE of Care LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Access to and Utilization of Care Placer State Indicators Access to 2009-  Uninsured per 100 population age 0 to 18 5.8 9.3 2011 and Uninsured per 100 female population age 18 to 2009-  13.1 22.1 64 2011 Utilizati tion 2009-  Medi-Cal insured deliveries per 100 live births 25.4 47.2 2011 of Care Prenatal care in the first trimester per 100 2009-  85.7 83.3 females delivering a live birth 2011 Had a doctor visit in the last year per 100 2011- 90.4+ 89.4 children age 0 to 17 2012 Had a doctor visit in the last year per 100 females 2011- 85.7 85.9 age 18 and over 2012 Dental visit in the past year per 100 children age 2011- 89.5+ 85.8 3 to 11 2012 Medicaid/CHIP enrollees who receive any dental 2011 43.7 52.2 a service per 100 enrollees age 1 to 20  Medi-Cal enrollment per 1,000 age 0-22 2012 151.6 353.4 Kindergartners with immunizations exemptions  2013 8.1 2.8 due to personal belief, per 100

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Births within 24 months of previous birth Caesarean births Gestational diabetes Substance abuse by pregnant women Domestic violence calls Smoking during pregnancy Mental health of women Regular mammograms and pap smears Fertility rate Maternal and Women’s Health

How does Placer compare to CA? Mater ernal al and MUCH WORSE Women’s Health lth LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Maternal and Women’s Health Indicators Placer State MCAH GOALS Maternal l Births within 24 months of a previous birth per 2009-  20.3 21.0 100 females age 15 to 44 delivering a live birth 2011 and Cesarean births per 100 low risk females 2009-  23.5 27.6 delivering a live birth 2011 Women’s Gestational diabetes per 1,000 females age 15 to 2009-  1.8 1.0 44 delivering a live or still-born infant in-hospital 2011 Substance use diagnoses per 1,000 2009-  Health lth 13.3 14.0 hospitalizations of pregnant females age 15 to 44 2011 Mood disorder hospitalizations per 100,000 2009- 1,030.6  1296.7 female population age 15 to 44 2011 Assault hospitalizations per 100,000 females age 2009-  5.1 10.6 15 to 44 2011 2009-  Domestic violence calls per 100,000 population 239.0 439.5 2011 Any smoking during the 1st or 3rd trimester per  2011 10.1+ 8.1 100 females with live births 2011- Current smoker per 100 females 18 and older 11.1 11.0 2012 Binge drinking in the last year per 100 females age 2011- 23.6 23.6 18 and older 2012

Maternal and Women’s Health Indicators (Cont.) Placer State MCAH GOALS Maternal l Birth rate per 1000 women age 15-44 2010 48.2 58.5 and Percent of women age 50+ that report a 2008-  87.0 82.2 mammogram in the past two years 2010 Women’s Percent of women age 18+ that report Pap test in 2008-  78.9 78.2 the last three years 2010 Health lth

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Infant deaths Low birth weights Premature births Infant Health lth

How does Placer compare to CA? Infant Health lth MUCH WORSE LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Infant Health Indicators Placer State MCAH GOALS Infant t Deaths at age less than 1 year per 1,000 live 2003- 4.18 5.14 births 2009 Health lth Births less than 37 weeks gestation per 100 live 2009-  7.9 8.6 births 2011 Births weighing less than 2,500 grams per 100 2009-  5.6 6.8 live births 2011 Births weighing less than 1,500 grams per 100 2009-  1.0 1.2 live births 2011

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Childhood overweight and obesity rates Women’s overweight and obesity rates In-hospital breastfeeding rates Physical activity Nutrition and Physica cal Activity

How does Placer compare to CA? Nutr triti tion and MUCH WORSE Phys ysical Activity ty LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

MCAH GOALS Nutrition and Physical Activity Indicators Placer State Nutritio tion Overweight children per 100 population age 2 to 2010 25 42.1 5 enrolled in CHDP and Overweight and obese public school students per 2010 25.8 38.0 100 population in grades 5, 7, 9, & 11 Physica cal l Overweight and obesity per 100 females age 15 2011- 41.4 43.1 to 44 2012 Activity Daily folic acid use in the month before  2011 34.9 34.4 pregnancy per 100 females delivering a live birth Exclusive in-hospital breastfeeding per 100 2012 78.9 62.6 females delivering a live birth Physical inactivity: Percentage of children in 2011- grades 5, 7, and 9 ranking within the "High Risk" 22.6 37.2 or “Needs Improvement” zones for aerobic 2012 capacity on the Fitnessgram physical fitness test Overweight youth: Percentage of children in grades 5, 7, and 9 ranking within the "Needs 2011- Improvement" category (Overweight) for body 12.8 14.5 2012 composition on the Fitnessgram physical fitness test

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Teen pregnancies Child deaths Youth injuries Youth substance abuse Childhood asthma Child/Adole lesce cent Health lth

How does Placer compare to CA? Child / Adolescent MUCH WORSE Health th LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Child/Adolescent Health Indicators Placer State Child / MCAH GOALS 2009-  Births per 1,000 females age 15 to 17 5.1 16.8 2011 Adolescent t 2009-  Births per 1,000 females age 15 to 19 12.7 31.6 2011 Births within 24 months of a previous birth per 100 2009-  52.0 56.7 Health th females age less than 20 delivering a live birth 2011 2009-  Deaths per 100,000 population age 1 to 4 years 31.3 22.7 2011 2009-  Deaths per 100,000 population age 5 to 14 years 8.2 11.2 2011 2009-  Deaths per 100,000 population age 15 to 19 48.7 41.7 2011 2009-  Deaths per 100,000 population age 20 to 24 95.3 70.3 2011 Motor vehicle injury hospitalizations per 100,000 2009-  16.2 18.1 population age 0 to 14 2011 Mental health hospitalizations per 100,000 2009-  1444.5 1,281.9 population age 15 to 24 2011 Substance abuse hospitalizations per 100,000 2009-  696.8 638.7 population age 15 to 24 2011 Reported cases of chlamydia per 100,000 female  2012 1777.6 2,905.4 population age 15 to 24 Self-inflicted injuries: Nonfatal hospitalized per 2008-  35.3 48.4 100,000 age 10-19 2010 2008-  Self-inflicted injuries: Fatal per 100,000 age 10-19 3.5 3.0 2010 2011-  Asthma Diagnoses age 1-17 23.7 15.4 2012

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Poverty Children in foster care Unemployment High school dropout rates Socio-Eco Economi mic c Determi minan ants

How does Placer compare to CA? Socio- Economic ic MUCH WORSE Determ rmin inants LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Socio-Economic Health Determinants Placer State Poverty (0-200% FPL) per 100 population age 18 to 2009-  20.2 33.8 64 2011 Socio- Poverty (0-200% FPL) per 100 population age 0 to 2009-  24.3 45.5 18 2011 Economic ic Children in foster care per 1,000 children age 0 to 2009-  3.3 6.8 Healt lth 17 2011 Dete termi minants ts Unemployment per 100 people in the 2009-  11.2 12.3 employment market 2011 Single mothers living in poverty per 100 single 2012 33.4 39.4 mothers Children receiving free or reduced price meals at  2012 28.6 57.5 school per 100 students High school dropout per 100 students in grades 9-  2011 5.8 14.7 12

COMPARING PLACER TO CALIFORNIA Ozone levels Second-hand smoke exposure Environmen ental al Health lth

How does Placer compare to CA? Environ onmenta tal Health th MUCH WORSE LITTLE WORSE LITTLE BETTER MUCH BETTER

Environ onmental Environmental Health Determinants Placer State Health Number of days with ozone above regulatory  2011 21 16 standards Smoking in households with children < 5 per 100 2010 3.0 3.0 enrolled in CHDP

Assessing the Data

CRITERIA The issue reflects a condition or outcome that is severe or affects large numbers of people The issue reflects an unmet need (i.e. an underserved population or underserved area). There are resources or assets in the community that can be mobilized to address the problem. Political will – there are partners willing to address the problem in the community. When You Are Re Ready to Prioritize

Time to get to work…