Already a member or subscriber? Sign in now

A Practice Designed to Address Social Determinants of Health

ANGELA BYMASTER, MD, FAAFP
NICHOLAS FONG

FPM. 2024;31(4):13-18.

Author disclosures: no relevant financial relationships.

Leveraging a concierge model allows this practice to fund charity care and creatively address social determinants of health in underserved communities.

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are widely known to have profound effects on overall health.1 Variables such as wealth and income, educational attainment, dietary habits and food access, cultural influences, access to parks and sports, cleanliness of the local environment, number and quality of relationships, and the presence of meaningful spiritual expression all affect a community's health in significant ways.2,3 Certain SDOH may even have a greater impact on health than commonly performed clinical services such as cancer screenings.4

Yet most clinics don't address SDOH in a meaningful way. Doing so requires a major shift in the way we think about disease diagnosis and treatment, and the way we allocate resources. This article describes an innovative practice model in which an outpatient clinic can creatively and effectively address SDOH in a primary care setting.

KEY POINTS

  • In the authors' concierge practice, each full-price patient funds their own primary care and that of two low-income patients.
  • The funding model allows family medicine clinics to meaningfully address social determinants of health in a local, low-income community.
  • Traditional practices can incorporate aspects of the model by focusing on a specific neighborhood and a specific SDOH to start.

THE PRACTICE MODEL

Healing Grove Health Center clinics are located in low-income neighborhoods and hire staff from the communities they serve. They are place-based clinics, focusing on the specific needs of the local community. Each population has a unique set of strengths and struggles, and our clinics leverage the strengths to tackle the struggles. Originally, we had one clinic in San Jose working with Spanish-speaking immigrants. This is the most mature site and will be the focus of this article, but we have since added three sites in other counties in California.

The clinics are concierge-direct primary care (DPC) hybrids, with concierge patients paying $200 per month. Each full-price patient funds their own primary care and that of two low-income patients. The goal is to have 300 concierge patients plus 600 low-income patients per physician, resulting in a panel of 900 patients.

The concierge fees cover the clinic rent, supplies, and salaries for the physicians and a small staff consisting of a receptionist, patient navigator, and medical assistant. The clinics are organized as nonprofits and also receive donations and apply for select grants. As funding allows, we employ staff who work full time addressing SDOH. We also have a network of volunteers. Our clinics can bill insurance (e.g., for certain procedures that aren't covered under the membership fee), though sometimes this requires more staff time than it is worth. The nature of the funding model allows our clinics to be creative and responsive to our patients' unique needs.

Dr. Bymaster is a family physician at Healing Grove Health Center in San Jose, Calif.

Nicholas Fong is a pre-medical student who provided research assistance.

Send comments to fpmedit@aafp.org, or add your comments to the article online.

Author disclosures: no relevant financial relationships.

  1. 1.Snyder-Mackler N, Burger JR, Gaydosh L, et al. Social determinants of health and survival in humans and other animals. Science. 2020;368(6493):eaax9553.
  2. 2.Singh GK, Daus GP, Allender M, et al. Social determinants of health in the United States: addressing major health inequality trends for the nation, 1935–2016. Int J MCH AIDS. 2017;6(2):139-164.
  3. 3.Walker RJ, Gebregziabher M, Martin-Harris B, Egede LE. Independent effects of socioeconomic and psychological social determinants of health on self-care and outcomes in Type 2 diabetes. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014;36(6):662-668.
  4. 4.Bretthauer M, Wieszczy P, Løberg M, et al. Estimated lifetime gained with cancer screening tests: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183(11):1196-1203.
  5. 5.Christensen DL, Maenner MJ, Bilder D, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 4 years. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019;68(2):1-19.
  6. 6.Han D, Dieujuste N, Doom JR, Narayan AJ. A systematic review of positive childhood experiences and adult outcomes: promotive and protective processes for resilience in the context of childhood adversity. Child Abuse Negl. 2023;144:106346.
  7. 7.Baćak V, Andersen LH, Schnittker J. The effect of timing of incarceration on mental health: evidence from a natural experiment. Social Forces. 2019;98(1):303-328.
  8. 8.Koren HS, Butler CD. The interconnection between the built environment ecology and health. In: Environmental Security and Environmental Management: The Role of Risk Assessment. Springer; 2006.
  9. 9.Graham G. Disparities in cardiovascular disease risk in the United States. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2015;11(3):238-245.
  10. 10.Rees DI, Sabia JJ. Sports participation and academic performance: evidence from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Econ Educ Rev. 2010;29(5):751-759.
  11. 11.Leigh-Hunt N, Bagguley D, Bash K, et al. An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness. Public Health. 2017;152:157-171.
  12. 12.Levin J. Partnerships between the faith-based and medical sectors: implications for preventive medicine and public health. Prev Med Rep. 2016;4:344-350.
  13. 13.Koenig HG. Association of religious involvement and suicide. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73(8):775-776.
  14. 14.Koenig HG, George LK, Meador KG, Blazer DG, Ford SM. Religious practices and alcoholism in a southern adult population. Hosp Community Psychiatry. 1994;45(3):225-231.
  15. 15.Bonelli R, Dew RE, Koenig HG, Rosmarin DH, Vasegh S. Religious and spiritual factors in depression: review and integration of the research. Depress Res Treat. 2012:962860.
  16. 16.Rosmarin DH, Koenig HG, ed. Handbook of Religion and Mental Health. Academic Press; 1998:129–145,175–200.
  17. 17.Koenig HG, Berk LS, Daher NS, et al. Religious involvement is associated with greater purpose, optimism, generosity, and gratitude in persons with major depression and chronic medical illness. J Psychosom Res. 2014;77(2):135-143.
  18. 18.McCullough ME, Hoyt WT, Larson DB, Koenig HG, Thoresen C. Religious involvement and mortality: a meta-analytic review. Health Psychol. 2000;19(3):211-222.

Copyright © 2026 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.

This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. See permissions for copyright questions and/or permission requests.