Evidence-based interventions (EBIs) exist to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but implementation remains slow in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Assessing organizational readiness can improve EBI implementation outcomes, but no studies have quantitatively examined the relation between organizational readiness subcomponents and implementation outcomes. This study examines associations between readiness subcomponents and CRC screening EBI implementation outcomes in FQHCs.

We used data from an ongoing parent study to develop an organizational readiness measure using the R = MC2 heuristic. We conducted descriptive and cross-sectional analyses using FQHC clinic (n = 57) data across three states. A clinic contact completed a survey about clinic characteristics and then distributed an EBI-specific survey to clinic staff containing readiness and implementation questions about Community Guide EBIs (e.g., patient reminders). Pearson correlations assessed bivariate associations between readiness variables and implementation outcomes. We then computed multivariable linear associations between readiness variables and implementation outcomes while controlling for clinic-level variables. One-way analysis of variance tested group differences in readiness subcomponent mean scores using EBI implementation responses.

Respondents’ most common job type was medical assistant, and the most frequently implemented EBIs were provider or patient reminders. Organizational structure was associated with implementing patient reminders. Clinics reporting inconsistent implementation had lower organizational structure scores than clinics planning or fully implementing patient reminders.

This study guides researchers in prioritizing organizational structure and selecting specific implementation strategies to improve this construct to implement CRC screening-related EBIs. Future research should examine these associations using a larger sample size to explore additional relations between organizational readiness and implementation outcomes.

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are an important contributor to health status and health outcomes. In this analysis, we compare SDOH measured both at the individual and population levels in patients with high comorbidity who receive primary care at Federally Qualified Health Centers in New York and Chicago and enrolled in the Tipping Points trial.

We analyzed individual- and population-level measures of SDOH in 1,488 patients with high comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 4) enrolled in Tipping Points. At the individual level, we used a standardized patient-reported questionnaire. At the population level, we employed patient addresses to calculate the Social Deprivation Index (SDI) and Area Deprivation Index. Multivariable regressions were conducted in addition to qualitative feedback from stakeholders.

Individual-level SDOH are distinct from population-level measures. Significant component predictors of population SDI are being unhoused, unable to pay for utilities, and difficulty accessing medical transportation. Qualitative findings mirrored these results. High comorbidity patients report significant SDOH challenges at the individual level. Fitting a binomial generalized linear model, the comorbidity score is significantly predicted by the composite individual SDOH index (p < 0.0001) controlling for age and race/ethnicity.

Individual- and population-level SDOH measures provide different risk assessments. The use of community-level SDI data is informative in the aggregate but should not be used to identify patients with individual unmet social needs. Health systems should implement a standardized individualized assessment of unmet SDOH needs and build strong, enduring partnerships with community-based organizations that can provide those services.

Severe weather events exacerbate existing health disparities due to poorly managed non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Our objective is to understand the experiences of staff, providers, and administrators (employees) of Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands (USVI) in providing care to patients living with NCDs in the setting of recent climate-related extreme events.

We used a convergent mixed-methods study design. A quantitative survey was distributed to employees at 2 FQHCs in Puerto Rico and the USVI, assessing experience with disasters, knowledge of disaster preparedness, the relevance of NCDs, and perceived gaps. Qualitative in-depth interviews explored their experience providing care for NCDs during recent disasters. Quantitative and qualitative data were merged using a narrative approach.

Through the integration of quantitative and qualitative data, we recognize: (1) significant gaps in confidence and preparedness of employees with a need for more training; (2) challenges faced by persons with multiple NCDs, especially cardiovascular and mental health disorders; and (3) most clinicians do not discuss disaster preparedness with patients but recognize their important role in community resilience.

With these results, we recommend strengthening the capacity of FQHCs to address the needs of their patients with NCDs in disasters.