Print Text Only
As printed
in Michigan Health & Hospitals Magazine, Sept/Oct 2000
The Community Benefits Column
Community Benefits are Key: Community Benefit
and Diversity, Part I
By Robert M. Sigmond
Health services management today is emphasizing the value
of diversity, especially in response to varied patient populations
and labor markets. However, as yet, little attention has been
given to diversity in community benefit programs.
Many
of these programs have focused more attention on particular
population segments than on the entire diverse community.
Generally, populations singled out for community benefit initiatives
are disadvantaged and underserved and most deserving of priority
consideration. But when the focus is on benefiting a special
population, with no explicit relationship to overall community-wide
goals, then such initiativesmay not actually benefit the community.
They may even have the opposite effect, of supporting two-track
medical care: one track for the advantaged and a separate
track for the disadvantaged. Our history demonstrates
the contradiction in "separate but equal" policies.
Diversity initiatives should be designed to unify
rather than to divide.
The
problem stems from the two quite distinct meanings of the
word "community" in the community benefit literature.
The accepted definition in the New York University Community
Benefit Standards, also adopted
by the Health Research Education Trust of the American Hospital
Association Healthy Communities Coalition, emphasizes the
sense of interdependence and belonging among the diverse people
and organizations within a circumscribed geographic area.
An equally valid dictionary definition is of a
population group sharing common characteristics or interests,
perceived as distinct in some respect
from the larger society within which it exists. From one perspective,
the two definitions are completely contradictory, reflecting
community interest versus special interest. From another perspective,
they are closely related, especially if one sees special interest
groups as the necessary elements of any
targeted geographic community.
For
community benefit programming, both definitions are important
and useful, especially when special population initiatives
reflect and nurture a sense of interdependence with the other
diverse populations
and organizations in the target geographic area.
All
geographic communities consist of community elements, such
as the Afro-American community,
the church community, the senior citizens community, the provider
community, and so many more.
Each of these reflects at least some sense of interdependence
with the others. With hardly any
exception, however, every organization in any community is
more closely committed to special
interests than to broad community interest. This is not only
true of health services organizations
but also of church organizations, business organizations,
and all the others. My experience in
community initiatives suggests that, in the absence of a crisis,
any organization that claims to
put community first, ahead of its unique mission, has not
yet faced up to its community
responsibilities realistically.
Effective
community initiatives depend on finding and exploiting linkages
between the stronger special interests and the weaker community
interests of every organization in ways that benefit the entire
community. Future columns will explore opportunities to promote
collaboration among special
interest community elements to benefit the diverse geographic
community that they share.
ROBERT
M. SIGMOND IS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR NORTHLAND
HEALTH GROUP, SOUTH PORTLAND MAINE, AND A SCHOLAR-IN-RESIDENCE
AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ADMINISTRATION TEMPLE I UNIVERSITY, PHILADELPHIA.
HE CAN BE REACHED AT (215) 561-5730 OR E-MAILED AT RSIGMOND@THUNDER.OCIS.TEMPLE.EDU.
