- The SPH Laboratory System mission, purpose and range of services are evaluated on a regular basis
- The range of technologies in use by the SPH Laboratory System is periodically surveyed and evaluated, with objective reports shared across the SPH Laboratory System
Indicator 9.2 System Effectiveness, Quality and Consumer Satisfaction 33%
- The effectiveness of personal and population-based laboratory services provided throughout the state is regularly determined.
- The quality of personal and population-based laboratory services provided throughout the state is regularly determined
Indicator 9.3 SPH Laboratory System Collaboration 33%
- The level and utility of collaboration among members of the SPH Laboratory System is measured and shared
Next Steps for Action, Essential Service #9:
Conduct an inventory of the “system:”--Assess/ evaluate the capacity for all private, public and governmental stakeholders for specific testing procedures and services offered for emergency preparedness and technology advancements. Both up (MDH) and across stakeholders (lab to lab) (high)
Assess differences in clinical, agriculture and environmental stakeholders and stakeholder processes and provide inventory of services and the quickest turnaround (e.g. the need for the MLS on the agriculture/food and environmental side of the system).
Identify and communicate the types of laboratories (e.g. sentinel, non-sentinel, private, governmental) that are within the network and what samples can be analyzed within each laboratory and capacity
Communicate the mission and range of services to all stakeholders (e.g. law enforcement, community leaders and general public)
Assure bidirectional communication and procedure for capacity and sample contingency plans.
Once inventoried, formalize the system (e.g. MOU, IAA or emergency assistance compact) between private and government stakeholders for contingency; create templates (MOW, IAA) that are ready for action if they become necessary
Establish a system for evaluating policy decisions and implementation (i.e. long term assessment of effects) (high)
Systematically use assessments for policy change (high)
Measure exposures and long term health outcomes
Develop assessments to aid in policy development
Foster policy development across food and environmental labs; may want to model the clinical system for communication and emergency response procedures
Develop a formal evaluation procedure for obtaining feedback from stakeholders and formal procedures for implementing feedback; gather feedback and evaluations on all levels (i.e., include clinicians)
Evaluate cost of systems and responses (e.g. MLS evaluation)
Define measurement criteria for the establishment of informal and formal partnerships/working relationships among stakeholders
Evaluate collaborative mechanisms and explore procedures for formal and informal procedures; determine who will be evaluated, internally and externally