Abstract
This chapter discusses the reporting and dissemination components of health impact assessment (HIA). The chapter first outlines the need to tailor information for different audiences and identifies pros and cons of different report formats including a formal report, executive summary, community report, briefing report, and inclusion in an environmental impact assessment. The chapter then discusses approaches to disseminating the results and reviews guiding principles for effective HIA reporting and dissemination. The “who, what, how, and when” of HIA dissemination is determined by an array of factors including regulatory requirements, the audience, the purpose for sharing the HIA results, and local protocols, modes, and language. These sections are summarized in nine guiding principles for HIA reporting and dissemination. Three case studies conclude the chapter by highlighting aspects of reporting and dissemination that have proven important in real-world applications. The first examines a professional communications strategy. The second looks at the mixed results of new technology. The third and final case study looks at reporting as an iterative, rather than a static, process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
One example of a format used to put important information first is the 1:3:25 structure developed by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF 2001). The term “1:3:25” refers to the number of pages in each section of the report—one page that presents bulleted main messages of the report, followed by a 3-page executive summary and a 25-page technical report. The one-pager is key. It is not a summary of all the methods or findings; rather, it is the lessons decision-makers should take away from the research. As the CHSRF states: “This is your chance, based on your research, to tell decision-makers what implications your work has for theirs.” In the case of an HIA, these are likely to be the recommendations, as they comprise the most valuable take-away information for decision-makers about the HIA (Harris et al. 2007).
References
CDC Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (2008) State program evaluation guides: writing SMART objectives. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Atlanta
CHSRF (2001) Communication notes: reader-friendly writing 1:3:25. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. Ottawa
Harris P, Harris-Roxas B, Harris E, Kemp L (2007) Health impact assessment: a practical guide. Centre for health equity training research and evaluation, University of New South Wales. Sydney
Human Impact Partners (2008) A health impact assessment of the California Healthy Families, Healthy Workplaces Act of 2008. http://www.humanimpact.org/doc-lib/finish/5/72. Accessed 18 June 2013
Upstream Public Health (2011) Oregon farm to school policy HIA. http://www.healthimpactproject.org/resources/document/Upstream-HIA-Oregon-Farm-to-School-policy.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2013
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ross, C., Orenstein, M., Botchwey, N. (2014). Reporting and Dissemination. In: Health Impact Assessment in the United States. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7303-9_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7303-9_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7302-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7303-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)