The Taxonomy of Community Benefits: Historical Overview

Last Updated on April 16, 2022 by Lee Burnett, DO, FAAFP

THE NATIONAL PROJECT ON THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS OF FAMILY MEDICINE RESIDENCY PROGRAMS

THE TAXONOMY

Site of the St Vincent de Paul Village/University of California San Diego Family Medicine/Psychiatry Residency located in San Diego
Site of the St Vincent de Paul Village/University of California San Diego Family Medicine/Psychiatry Residency serving homeless populations of San Diego

In August, 2000, the Coastal Research Group observed that family medicine residency programs performed a number of functions within their communities that had never been subject to formal description and analysis.  An invitation was extended to Coastal Research Group members to assemble within the executive offices of the American Academy of Family Physicians in Leawood, Kansas. There, a brainstorming session was held to characterize the likely impact of such residency training on host hospitals and communities.

At the Twelfth National Conference on Primary Health Care Access, held in San Diego in April, 2001, Doctor Samuel Matheny provided a Literature Review on the subject of community benefits.  In September 2001, the First National Workshop on the Community Benefits of Family Practice Residency Programs was scheduled in Newport Beach, California.  At this Workshop the previous year?s brainstorming efforts were organized into a Taxonomy of Community Benefits.

During the subsequent year, Workshop participants met with hospital administrators and other officials to survey them on the history of the administrative decisions related to creation of and continuation of support for residency programs.  A report on these surveys was made at the Second National Workshop in Louisville, Kentucky and subsequently presented to the Program Directors Workshop of the Association of Family Medicine Residency Programs in Kansas City, Missouri in June 2003.

At the 2002 National Workshop in Louisville, a Site Visit Survey was developed.  The Survey was field tested at three ?profiled? residency programs and grouped into questions that corresponded to the previously developed Taxonomy of Community Benefits.  Those questions and their field test responses were critiqued at the Third National Workshop, held in San Diego in September, 2003 by small groups, each associated with one of the Taxonomy sections.

Between the Third and Fourth National Workshops 26 additional Survey Site Visits were conducted at profiled residency programs.  At the Fourth National Workshop in Indianapolis in September, 2004, a group of working hypotheses were presented relating to the first six taxonomy sections.  Those hypotheses were the subject of additional focused studies.

Meanwhile, Survey Site Visit responses are being recorded and critiqued for an additional nine taxonomy sessions, with the expectations of the development of additional working hypotheses.

The following list of Taxonomy Sections records the evolution of the Taxonomy:

Taxonomy Section I (Ambulatory Patient Care Services)

This section was established as Patient Care Servuces in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001.  Subsequently, parts of this section became Section X (Inpatient Services), Section XII (Chronic Disease Management), Section XIII (Elder Care) and Section XIV (Behavioral Health Services).

Taxonomy Section II (Access)

This section was established in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001.

Taxonomy Section III (Physician Graduates)

This section was established in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001.

Taxonomy Section IV (Quality Improvement)

This section was established in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001.

Taxonomy Section V (Benefits to Host Institution)

This section was established in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001.

Taxonomy Section VI (Community Services)

This section was established in preparation for the First National Workshop in September 2001. Subsequently, parts of this section became Section IX (Community Need Assessment) and Section XV (Advocacy).

Taxonomy Section VII (Health Workforce Training)

This section was added by the First National Workshop in September 2001.

Taxonomy Section VIII (Scholarship and Research)

This section was added by the First National Workshop in September 2001 as Research and Professional Development.  In November 2004 several questions were transferred to a new Taxonomy Section XVII (Professional Organizations) and this section was renamed.

Taxonomy Section IX (Community Needs Assessment)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section II (Access) in May 2004.

Taxonomy Section X (Inpatient Services)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section I (Patient Care Services) in May 2004.

Taxonomy Section XI (Institutional Missions)

This section was created in June 2004.

Taxonomy Section XII (Chronic Disease Management)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section I (Ambulatory Care Services) in July 2004.

Taxonomy Section XIII (Elder Care)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section I (Ambulatory Care Services) in July 2004.

Taxonomy Section XIV (Behavioral Health Services)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section I (Ambulatory Care Services) in July 2004.

Taxonomy Section XV (Advocacy)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section VI (Community Services) in August 2004.

Taxonomy Section XVI (Geographical Distribution of Services)

This section was created in November 2004 by separating various questions from Taxonomy Sections I, VI, X, XII and XIII requesting the street addresses of points of service.

Taxonomy Section XVII (Professional Organizations)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section VIII (Teaching, Research and Professional Development) in November 2004.

Taxonomy Section XVIII (Public Health Department Linkages)

This section was separated from Taxonomy Section VI (Community Services) in December 2004.

Last Updated (31 January 2005 11:27)

[Back to list]

Go To Top

 

 

people found this article helpful. What about you?