Healthy Arizona
Search for Indicators

Pima County Community Health Improvement Plan

2013-2017 Community Health Improvement PlanCommunity Health Improvement Plan

From 2010 to early 2013, under the leadership of the Pima County Health Department (PCHD), organizations and community members engaged in a comprehensive community health assessment and improvement planning process. The goal of this intensive, community-driven process was to examine the current health needs of Pima County residents and determine how to best address them.

Developing strong and lasting partnerships is fundamental to a healthy community. The Healthy Pima initiative was formed to inspire, lead, and ultimately own the community health assessment and improvement planning process. Healthy Pima currently has over 200 members from government, for-profit, and not-for-profit organizations, representing advocacy, behavioral health, community and faith-based services, health care, education, employers, unions, American Indian communities, and philanthropy. Its members are all invested in the health of our community and have a strong inclination to collaborate and are able to influence others.

The priorities that comprise the Community Health Improvement Plan are:

  • Healthy Lifestyles
  • Health Literacy
  • Access to Care
  • Health Disparities
Action groups have been formed around these health priorities and have formed work plans, established time lines, developed evaluation benchmarks, and are implementing the Community Health Implementation Plan.
 
The Healthy Pima initiative is now well into the action phase of our community health assessment and improvement planning process. Healthy Pima membership will continue to be fluid as new members are always welcome and needed as the implementation phases unfold. Rather than this being a finite initiative with a clear end in sight, it is an ongoing process to address the health priorities of our community.
 
Quick Links
See the Legend

Access to Health Services

Access to Health Services

Access to Health Services

County: Pima

Access to Health Services

County: Pima

61.9%
(2012)
Compared to:
61.6%
AZ Value
(61.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
67.2%
US Value
(67.2%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
86.7%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 83.7%, Green Cutoff: 88.4%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 819 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
85.4%
AZ Value
(85.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
86.9%
US Value
(86.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (86.7) is greater than the previously measured value (82.2)
Prior Value
(82.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
100.0% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(100.0%)
92.1%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 94.0%, Green Cutoff: 96.3%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 819 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
91.7%
AZ Value
(91.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
95.2%
US Value
(95.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (92.1) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (89.3)
Prior Value
(89.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
100.0% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(100.0%)
15.0%
(2012)
Compared to:
15.0%
AZ Value
(15.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
14.2%
US Value
(14.2%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
75.5%
(2012)
Compared to:
69.5%
AZ Value
(69.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
74.0%
US Value
(74.0%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
81.1% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(81.1%)
67.0%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 59.2%, Green Cutoff: 65.3%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
67.9%
AZ Value
(67.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
74.5%
US Value
(74.5% in 2010-2014)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
This value (67.0) is greater than the previously measured value (65.1)
Prior Value
(65.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is decreasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
77.9% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(77.9%)
78.8%
(2012)
Compared to:
73.3%
AZ Value
(73.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
78.0%
US Value
(78.0%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
93.0% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(93.0%)

Environmental Health

Environmental Health

Environmental Health

County: Pima

Environmental Health

County: Pima

5.1%
(2010)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 8.7%, Green Cutoff: 8.0%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 7.0%, Green Cutoff: 4.4%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,143 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
7.3%
(2010)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 18.2%, Green Cutoff: 12.3%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 10.3%, Green Cutoff: 6.2%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,143 U.S. counties and county equivalents.

Mental Health and Mental Disorders

Mental Health and Mental Disorders

Mental Health and Mental Disorders

County: Pima

Mental Health and Mental Disorders

County: Pima

13.5%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 12.0%, Green Cutoff: 11.9%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 18.5%, Green Cutoff: 16.3%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,113 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
12.9%
AZ Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
16.7%
US Value
(16.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (13.5) is less than the previously measured value (13.6)
Prior Value
(13.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Poverty

Poverty

Poverty

County: Pima

Poverty

County: Pima

27.5%
(2011-2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 33.8%, Green Cutoff: 29.0%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 29.5%, Green Cutoff: 22.5%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
26.0%
AZ Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
21.7%
US Value
(21.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (27.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (26.7)
Prior Value
(26.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
13.3%
(2011-2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 17.6%, Green Cutoff: 13.6%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 15.1%, Green Cutoff: 11.3%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
13.3%
AZ Value
(13.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
11.3%
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (13.3) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (13.2)
Prior Value
(13.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

County: Pima Income Inequality

0.473
(2011-2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 0.473, Green Cutoff: 0.440
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 0.464, Green Cutoff: 0.441
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
0.465
AZ Value
(0.465)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
0.479
US Value
(0.479)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (0.473) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (0.469)
Prior Value
(0.469)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
19.3%
(2011-2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 22.7%, Green Cutoff: 19.8%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 20.3%, Green Cutoff: 16.0%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
18.2%
AZ Value
(18.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
15.5%
US Value
(15.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (19.3) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (19.0)
Prior Value
(19.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is increasing significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Prevention & Safety

Prevention & Safety

Prevention & Safety

County: Pima

Prevention & Safety

County: Pima

13.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 19.3, Green Cutoff: 11.2
AZ Counties
(2014)
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
13.7
AZ Value
(13.7)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
This value (13.6) is greater than the previously measured value (11.4)
Prior Value
(11.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is decreasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
9.3 (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(9.3)

Wellness & Lifestyle

Wellness & Lifestyle

Wellness & Lifestyle

County: Pima

Wellness & Lifestyle

County: Pima

26.3%
(2009)
Compared to:
24.1%
AZ Value
(24.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona state value.
23.4%
US Value
(23.4%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
This value (26.3) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (30.4)
Prior Value
(30.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
59.5%
(2012)
Compared to:
62.0%
AZ Value
(62.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
63.4%
US Value
(63.4%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
This value (59.5) is greater than the previously measured value (58.5)
Prior Value
(58.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.

County: Pima Adults who Smoke

16.4%
(2012)
Compared to:
17.1%
AZ Value
(17.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
19.6%
US Value
(19.6%)
The regional value is compared to the median value of 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
This value (16.4) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (18.7)
Prior Value
(18.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
12.0% (Target Not Met)
HP 2020 Target
(12.0%)
23.1%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 30.5%, Green Cutoff: 26.3%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 24.4%, Green Cutoff: 20.9%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
24.0%
AZ Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
19.3%
US Value
(19.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (23.1) is less than the previously measured value (24.8)
Prior Value
(24.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is decreasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

County: Pima Food Insecurity Rate

14.6%
(2015)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 19.1%, Green Cutoff: 16.0%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
Red Cutoff: 16.3%, Green Cutoff: 13.6%
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
15.8%
AZ Value
(15.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Arizona State value.
13.7%
US Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
This value (14.6) is less than the previously measured value (15.4)
Prior Value
(15.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is decreasing, significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

County: Pima Teens who Smoke

12.0%
(2014)
Compared to:
Red Cutoff: 14.3%, Green Cutoff: 12.0%
AZ Counties
The distribution is based on data from 15 Arizona counties.
9.4%
AZ Value
(9.4%)
This value (12.0) is less than the previously measured value (14.0)
Prior Value
(14.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
The trend is decreasing, not significantly
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods. The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.