Established in 1965 as a part of President Johnson’s War on Poverty effort, the federal community health center (CHC) program is a primary source of federally-subsidized quality health care services for medically-vulnerable populations in the United States. Despite its current role as a medical safety-net for the nation’s health care system, the CHC program did not begin as a public health program, but rather as a social justice program. Since its formalization, the CHC program has enjoyed relatively consistent Congressional support as a cost-effective means of providing primary healthcare to indigent populations; however, the narrative of the program has shifted overtime from a focus of empowerment and lifting communities out of poverty, to the fortification of the national health care system as a cost-effective provider of quality healthcare care for all. In this manuscript, I argue that this transition from community empowerment and the mitigation of fundamental causes of disease to a more risk-based emphasis on the issue of access, has diminished the urgency around the engagement of the structural effects of poverty on health in favor of a “one size fits all” approach to the provision of basic health care. In an effort to objectively quantify the effects of geographic access on health as a means for evaluating the success of the contemporary program, this research project explores the extent to which proximal access to a CHC is significantly associated with various self-reported indicators of positive health outcomes. My primary research method is multivariable regression utilizing secondary data from the 2012 Southeastern Pennsylvania Household Health Survey, the 2008-2012 5-year American Community Survey Estimate, and the Health Resources and Services Administration Data Warehouse. Using statistical modeling, I test the effect of CHC access on three distinct measures of individual health: (1) self-reported health status, (2) the likelihood of having pain lasting 6 months or more, and (3) the likelihood of having a usual source of health care. Within each model, I also test a series of interaction terms through nested sub-models to uncover any conditional effects of access for selected social groups. This statistical design offers the opportunity to explore whether the main association between access to a CHC and health varies based on the social characteristics and/or social environment of the individual. The findings of my analysis suggest that the effect of CHC access varies for different social groups, with less disadvantaged groups, such as poor non-Hispanic whites with high social capital, and poor individuals living in areas of low disadvantage, receiving the greatest benefit from proximal CHC access. However, individuals at the extremes of social disadvantage benefit least from CHC access alone. I argue that while the provision of CHC access is a noble and necessary tactic for fighting the persistence of health disparities in our medically-vulnerable communities, focusing on access alone is insufficient to solve the problem. The pendulum must switch back to community empowerment and the eradication of structural threats to health to initiate real change for medically-vulnerable populations. / Sociology

Adult residents in rural communities have a higher incidence of chronic diseases. This fact coupled with low health literacy and a lack of primary and specialty care services makes the management of diseases such as diabetes difficult. The purpose of this doctoral project was to develop a diabetic health literacy program for staff of a rural federally qualified health care center (FQHC) that is the largest primary care center within a 5-county area in a rural mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Most residents have difficulty understanding diabetic information as it is presented to them, which leads to an increase in nonadherence to treatment plans, decreased health stature, increased comorbidities, and an increase in utilization of emergency room and acute care resources. A prior study of 140 randomized adult diabetic patients was the basis for the need of this project. Designed as a staff development in-service to educate nursing and the care provider team, this program integrated health literacy and therapeutic communication techniques into diabetic care. Using the health literate care model universal precautions approach, the project began as a pilot at one of the FQHC's clinical sites by assessing all patients for health literacy using the Newest Vital Sign screening tool. Staff were instructed on the validity of using health literate therapeutic communications as a bridge to adherence to diabetic treatment regimens. The project has potential to improve the overall health and promote positive social change in the rural community.

Access to primary health care services is a significant issue for many communities seeking to improve the health of their populations. This single case study describes the 12-year journey of 2 adjoining rural counties in 2 states towards meeting the primary and specialty care needs of the uninsured and underinsured population. Data were triangulated using historical documents, first-person interviews, and health utilization data. The community leadership moved through various models including a free clinic and a university-sponsored health center before finally establishing a federally qualified health center, which now serves 40,000 citizens in these counties. The site is now hosting new programs funded by research grants in alliance with area universities. Success is contributed to an unwavering desire to provide a medical home for the underinsured and underinsured, a shared vision, recognition that continued success was dependent on a funding source, recognition that practices and processes must be in place to assist with navigation for those in need of services to seek care at the appropriate venue, and a belief that the infrastructure built to provide care was sustainable. All participants recognized the importance of funding for sustainability. Positive social change has occurred from the emergence of a multidisciplinary center to serve the community's uninsured and underinsured, thus improving access to care, management of chronic conditions, and access to behavioral health professionals. Findings from this study may inform other communities faced with similar problems and can inform legislators of the importance of federally qualified health centers in the provision of health care to vulnerable populations.

Health psychologists with training in integrated care are ideal candidates to work in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). However, despite the large documented need for more behavioral health providers in FQHCs, psychologists are underrepresented in this setting compared to other behavioral health professions. The purpose of this study was to: 1) examine the specific beliefs that are most relevant to executives’ intentions to hire psychologists, 2) determine how executives’ perceived control over hiring psychologists varies by several demographic variables, and 3) examine how well the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) predicts executives’ intentions to hire psychologists. Method: Executives (N = 222) from every US Census defined division of the country completed an online TBP survey assessing demographics and beliefs about hiring psychologists. Path analysis was used to examine the relationships between TPB variables. Results: Executives ranked psychologists as highly proficient in integrated care and general clinical skills but less proficient in research and leadership skills. Compared to other skills, executives ranked research skills as lower in importance for clinical staff to possess. Longer executive job tenures (but not FQHC budget or rural status) predicted more perceived control over hiring practices. The standard TPB was a poor fit with the data, but a modified version explained 78% of the variance in executives’ intent to hire psychologists. In this model, executives’ normative beliefs were most predictive of their intent to hire. Implications: Results point to the importance of internal champions within FQHCs who advocate for psychologists as well as the need for early interprofessional education. Opportunities exist for health service psychologists to promote the value of research to executives and to differentiate themselves by emphasizing their skills in research and implementation science.

Between 2013 and 2016, 8.1% of U.S. adults 20 years and older suffered from depression, but only 29% of them sought help. This project addressed the low depression screening rate in a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) that supported integrated care. The purpose of the project was to evaluate the integration of behavioral health into primary care in an FQHC through the rate of depression screenings. Two theoretical frameworks, the find-organize-clarify-understand-select/plan-do-study-act model and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's framework for program evaluation in public health were combined into a list of questions and data validity tests that were used to conduct the evaluation. This quality improvement (QI) project evaluated an existing QI initiative. Findings revealed that 75% of the patients seen, and not the initially reported 53%, received depression screenings, which indicated an improved outcome. Other findings were inadequate use of theoretical frameworks, poor data quality, and suboptimal effectiveness of QI team processes. The strategies and tools recommended in this project could be used by organizational leaders and QI teams to evaluate and improve QI initiatives. The project's contribution to awareness about depression through integrated care could increase patients' access to care, quality of life, and life expectancy, and positively impact social change.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Oral health is crucial to overall health and a focus of the U.S. Health Center program, which provides preventive dental services in medically underserved communities. Dental hygiene is an oral health profession whose practice is focused on dental disease prevention and oral health promotion. Variations in the practice and regulation of dental hygiene has been demonstrated to influence access to dental care at a state level; restrictive policies are associated lower rates of access to care. Understanding whether and to what extent policy variations affect availability and access to dental care and the oral health of medically underserved communities served by grantees of the U.S. Health Center program is the focus of this study. This longitudinal study examines dental service utilization at 1,135 health center grantees that received community health center funding from 2004 to 2011. The Dental Hygiene Professional Practice Index (DHPPI) was used as an indicator of the state policy environment. The influence of grantee and state level characteristics are also considered. Mixed effects models were used to account for correlations introduced by the multiple hierarchical structure of the data. Key findings of this study demonstrate that state policy environment is a predictor of the availability and access to dental care and the oral health status of medically underserved communities that received care at a grantee of the U.S. Health Center program. Grantees located in states with highly restrictive policy environments were 73% less likely to deliver dental services and, those that do, provided care to 7% fewer patients than those grantees located in states with the most supportive policy environments. Population’s served by grantees from the most restrictive states received less preventive care and had greater restorative and emergency dental care needs. State policy environment is a predictor of availability and access to dental care and the oral health status of medically underserved communities. This study has important implications for policy at the federal, state, and local levels. Findings demonstrate the need for policy and advocacy efforts at all levels, especially within states with restrictive policy environments.