By Janice Sparks, PhD
Recently, I wrote a blog in relation to the headline, Hamstrung by ‘golden handcuffs’: Diversity roles disappear 3 years after George Floyd’s murder inspired them. The NBC News article highlights the loss, in major corporations, of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) officers who were hired in early 2020, due to many organizations that are reducing or eliminating these positions.
This article made me think about these roles in healthcare. Specifically, does this trend exist in healthcare? How does the presence or absence of these roles impact the development and implementation of health equity interventions, and does the trend reflect a healthcare organization’s commitment to advancing health equity? This is of particular importance in light of the growth in health equity policy development and increasing state contractual requirements mandating compliance to Medicaid and other publicly funded programs.
The industry with the largest number of chief diversity officers is education, at 26%, and healthcare comes in at 8%. The figure for healthcare is concerning because findings show that healthcare leadership and governance teams that reflect the communities they serve are more committed to including community voice in their decision-making. This commitment is conducive to best care practices, leading to better health outcomes. Collecting data on hiring trends for these roles is important and tells a story about the status of the roles and waning interest. While there is a trend to monitor activity around chief DEI positions, the same level of data tracking does not appear to exist for chief health equity officers (CHEO).
To be fair, CHEO roles are new for most organizations, so monitoring trends pertaining to them may not be on the radar. Spring Street is encouraged by the fact that so many of our community-based health plan colleagues and other healthcare entities are committed to advancing health equity and have hired CHEOs. These advances have the potential to move the needle on health equity and disparity reduction. But now that these roles have been secured, what does an organization do to monitor and retain the CHEO role?
DEI in general is under attack, and related roles face the same challenge. Failure to monitor CHEO hiring and retention practices puts hard-won appointee wins at risk for diminution or elimination due to political dynamics, fading interest, limited resources, and loss of appetite for continued attention to the issues that initiated their implementation.
As an industry, we should be monitoring these positions and ensuring that the roles continue. The federal government could also track hiring and retention patterns of CHEOs among federally funded healthcare organizations. This could shed light on the link between an organization’s ability to lead in the area of health equity and health equity advancements.
The questions posed at the beginning of this post will remain as CHEO roles evolve, and it will be interesting to watch what happens over time. The hope is that the growth of these roles remains to advance disparity reeducation and achieve health equity.