Health Needs Assessment Work Group
Meeting Minutes
February 7, 2001
ORRHES Members:
James Lewis, Co-Chair, Donna Mosby, Co-Chair, Al Brooks,
Pete Malmquist, Susan Kaplan, Kowetha Davidson, ORRHES
Chair
Public members:
Peggy Adkins
ATSDR Staff:
Jack Hanley, Theresa NeSmith, LaFreta Dalton, ATSDR (Conference
phone); and Bill Murray
1. CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Co-Chair, James Lewis
at 5:00 p.m. He reviewed the agenda for the staff in Atlanta.
2. INTRODUCTIONS:
The participants introduced themselves.
3. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF MEETING:
James Lewis began by stating his purpose for this meeting
is to review the Work Group members' understanding of what
George Washington University (GWU) will do in its health
needs assessment and to ensure that the results of the
survey are communicated to the community at large and to
individuals who need the information. His objective is
to formulate recommendations for the Oak Ridge Reservation
Health Effects Subcommittee (ORRHES) to consider presenting
to GWU. He then asked the other members for their thoughts
on this meeting.
Al Brooks said that he wanted to understand the health
needs of the community as well as those of individuals.
He does not want the process to turn into a critique of
DOE operations.
Pete Malmquist said not to focus on complainers and wants
to know how impacted residents can be found.
Kowetha Davidson said that we should go beyond needs identification
and ask how the needs can be met. We should be looking
at possible solutions and establish follow-up programs.
James Lewis reiterated that the focus is on problem identification
and definition.
Kowetha Davidson continued that GWU was going to do this
through focus groups, key informants and the telephone
survey.
James Lewis said that GWU has limited resources and wants
them to interact with the WG quickly to keep on track.
4. CUSTOMER:
James Lewis thought it was important to determine who
the customer is regarding the GWU survey. There was considerable
discussion on this issue and the key points are listed
below:
- The primary customer of the GWU survey is the public
- the community at large.
- All parties must work together; focusing on disagreements
will hinder progress.
- GWU and ATSDR will work as a team with ORRHES.
- Focus on ORR-related concerns and don't dilute with
other concerns.
- Consider individual concerns but don't get overwhelmed
by personal concerns.
- Distinguish between general health concerns and exposure-related
issues.
- Discriminate between perceived and actual environmentally
related concerns.
5. DISCUSSION OF KEY AGENDA ITEMS:
A. Perspective on GWU's presentation - Most WG members
thought the presentation was sketchy, lacking in details
of how they will proceed. This may have resulted from
the time limit for their talk. The ORRHES will use the
WG's reports and their own discussion to provide input
to GWU on focus groups, key informants, and the telephone
survey.
B. Discussion and recommendations regarding the major program components.
- Focus Groups - The WG is concerned about how many
of these groups will be used and how the members will
be selected. Both the WG and ORRHES should have input
to GWU on selecting and constituting these groups.
- Key informants - Similar thought were expressed on
this issue. How many, who are they? The WG and ORRHES
should have input to GWU.
- Telephone survey - The WG members are very concerned
about the small number (400) of telephone surveys that
will be conducted relative to the population of the
8-county area (800,000). The statistical basis for
this number must be provided to the WG and ORRHES.
C. Discussion of GWU interactions and communication
with the WG - The WG will work cooperatively with GWU
and wants to be kept informed of their activities and
would like to meet with their project staff as soon as
a meeting can be arranged.
6. ACTION ITEMS, OPEN QUESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
The following Action Items were itemized:
- The WG will develop a list of proposed focus groups
and key informants and send to Donna Mosby.
- GWU and ATSDR will propose focus groups.
- GWU will provide a written description of the process
they will follow.
- GWU will provide a written justification of the number
of telephone that is understandable to the non-scientist
but also will present the statistical basis.
- GWU will provide a status report on the focus groups
and the questions for the telephone survey.
- GWU will provide their definition of key informant
and examples and the number they plan to contact.
- GWU will specify the method by which they will communicate
with the WG and ORRHES and email to the WG.
The final thought expressed was that the objective of
this effort is to determine how the affected population
can provide input to the WG and ORRHES in a meaningful
way to reduce hostility, thereby increasing our credibility.
|