Dataset Information

The role of partnerships in U.S. Food Policy Council policy activities.

ABSTRACT: Food Policy Councils (FPC) help to identify and address the priorities of local, state, and regional food systems with the goal of improving food systems through policy. There is limited research describing FPCs' strategies for accomplishing this goal. As part of a larger study examining FPC policy efforts, this paper investigates the role of partnerships in food systems policy change. We conducted interviews with representatives from 12 purposefully selected FPCs in the United States and 6 policy experts identified by the selected FPC representatives to document and describe their policy work. One theme that emerged from those interviews was the role of partners. Interviewees described a range of partners (e.g., stakeholders from government, business, and education) and credited FPC partnerships with advancing their policy goals by increasing the visibility and credibility of FPCs, focusing their policy agenda, connecting FPCs to key policy inputs (e.g., local food community knowledge and priorities), and obtaining stakeholder buy-in for policy initiatives. Partnerships were also described as barriers to policy progress when partners were less engaged or had either disproportionate or little influence in a given food sector. Despite these challenges, partnerships were found to be valuable for FPCs efforts to effectively engage in the food policy arena.

SUBMITTER: Clayton ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4391857 | biostudies-other | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite controversy among experts regarding aducanumab's approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, little is known about public opinion on this matter.MethodsWe conducted a representative survey of U.S. adults ages 35 and older to (1) determine opinions regarding aducanumab's approval, (2) identify any evidence of reputational injury to the Food and Drug Administration, and (3) explore opinions regarding policy responses available to policymakers, such as those relating to a national coverage determination by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The survey was administered online and in English and Spanish using a probability-based sample derived from the National Opinion Research Center's AmeriSpeak® panel. Selection probabilities in the panel and survey design account for differences in population distribution and expected response rates by demographic. The survey was analyzed using survey weights to adjust for selection probabilities and non-response.ResultsA total of 1025 respondents completed the survey. While approximately three-quarters of respondents were initially unfamiliar with aducanumab, respondents were less supportive of the drug's approval once given information about the drug's potential clinical and economic impact. Sixty-three percent of respondents support restricting aducanumab access to patients most likely to benefit. Seventy-one percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member with mild Alzheimer's disease in a "waitlist"-style trial to further study aducanumab; sixty percent indicated a willingness to enroll a family member in a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eighty-one percent agree aducanumab should be withdrawn from the market if confirmatory trials fail. The median respondent was willing to pay $1-5 in higher Part B premiums to cover aducanumab.ConclusionThese findings demonstrate support for a range of proposed policies in response to aducanumab's approval. The opinions of an informed public ought to be considered when developing policies in response to aducanumab's approval.

Project description:ObjectiveThe Fellowship Council (FC) is transitioning to a competency-based medical education (CBME) model, including the introduction of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for training and assessment of Fellows. This study describes the implementation process employed by the FC during a ten-month pilot project and presents data regarding feasibility and perceived value.MethodsThe FC coordinated the development of EPAs in collaboration with the sponsoring societies for Advanced GI/MIS, Bariatrics, Foregut, Endoscopy and Hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) fellowships encompassing the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care for key competencies. Fifteen accredited fellowship programs participated in this project. The assessments were collected through a unique platform on the FC website. Programs were asked to convene a Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) on a quarterly basis. The pilot group met monthly to support and improve the process. An exit survey evaluated the perceived value of EPAs.ResultsThe 15 participating programs included 18 fellows and 106 faculty. A total of 655 assessments were initiated with 429 (65%) completed. The average (SD) number of EPAs completed for each fellow was 24(18); range 0-72. Intraoperative EPAs were preferentially completed (71%). The average(SD) time for both the fellow and faculty to complete an EPA was 27(78) hours. Engagement increased from 39% of fellows completing at least one EPA in September to 72% in December and declining to 50% in May. Entrustment level increased from 6% of EPAs evaluated as "Practice Ready" in September to 75% in June. The exit survey was returned by 63% of faculty and 72% of fellows. Overall, 46% of fellows and 74% of program directors recommended full-scale implementation of the EPA framework.ConclusionA competency-based assessment framework was developed by the FC and piloted in several programs. Participation was variable and required ongoing strategies to address barriers. The pilot project has prepared the FC to introduce CBME across all FC training programs.

Dataset Information

The role of partnerships in U.S. Food Policy Council policy activities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets