The Epidemiology and Surveillance Workforce among Local Health Departments in California: Mutual Aid and Surge Capacity for Routine and Emergency Infectious Disease Situations

Objective. Public health surveillance and epidemiologic investigations are critical public health functions for identifying threats to the health of a community. We conducted a survey of local health departments (LHDs) in California to describe the workforce that supports public health surveillance and epidemiologic functions during routine and emergency infectious disease situations. Methods. The target population consisted of the 61 LHDs in California. The online survey instrument was designed to collect information about the workforce involved in key epidemiologic functions. We also examined how the public health workforce increases its epidemiologic capacity during infectious disease emergencies. Results. Of 61 LHDs in California, 31 (51%) completed the survey. A wide range of job classifications contribute to epidemiologic functions routinely, and LHDs rely on both internal and external sources of epidemiologic surge capacity during infectious disease emergencies. This study found that while 17 (55%) LHDs reported having a mutual aid agreement with at least one other organization for emergency response, only nine (29%) LHDs have a mutual aid agreement specifically for epidemiology and surveillance functions. Conclusions. LHDs rely on a diverse workforce to conduct epidemiology and public health surveillance functions, emphasizing the need to identify and describe the types of staff positions that could benefit from public health surveillance and epidemiology training. While some organizations collaborate with external partners to support these functions during an emergency, many LHDs do not rely on mutual aid agreements for epidemiology and surveillance activities.

Download Full-text

How Do Infectious Disease Epidemiologist Positions Increase Public Health Capacity? Results from a Qualitative Study of Local Health Departments

Health Security ◽

10.1089/hs.2019.0083 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 17 (6) ◽

pp. 454-461

Author(s):

Kahler W. Stone ◽

Marilyn Felkner ◽

Maria Perez-Patron ◽

Cason Schmit ◽

Thomas J. McDonald ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Infectious Disease ◽

Qualitative Study ◽

Local Health ◽

Health Departments ◽

Local Health Departments

Download Full-text

Patterns of Cross-Sector Collaboration in Local Health Departments: A Cluster Analysis

Health Promotion Practice ◽

10.1177/1524839920972982 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 152483992097298

Author(s):

Alexis K. Grant

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Cluster Analysis ◽

Determinants Of Health ◽

Local Health ◽

Health Departments ◽

Local Health Departments ◽

Structural Determinants ◽

Cluster Assignment ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Top Executive

Local health departments (LHDs) are positioned to act as the community health strategist for their catchment area, which requires cross-sector collaboration. However, little research exists to understand how much and what types of cross-sector collaboration occur and its impact on LHD practice. Data from 490 LHDs who participated in the 2016 National Profile of Local Health Departments survey were analyzed to identify patterns of cross-sector collaboration among LHDs. In the survey, LHDs reported the presence of collaborative activities for each of 22 categories of organizations. Factor analysis was used to identify patterns in the types of organizations with which LHDs collaborate. Then, cluster analysis was conducted to identify patterns in the types of cross-sector collaboration, and cross-sectional analyses examined which LHD characteristics were associated with cluster assignment. LHDs collaborated most with traditional health care–oriented organizations, but less often with organizations focused on upstream determinants of health such as housing. Three distinct clusters represented collaboration patterns in LHDs: coordinators, networkers, and low-collaborators. LHDs who were low-collaborators were more likely to serve smaller populations, be unaccredited, have a smaller workforce, have a White top executive, and have a top executive without a graduate degree. These findings imply that public health practitioners should prioritize building bridges to a variety of organizations and engage in collaboration beyond information sharing. Furthermore, LHDs should prioritize accreditation and workforce development activities for supporting cross-sector collaboration. With these investments, the public health system can better address the social and structural determinants of health and promote health equity.

Download Full-text

Actionable lessons for the US COVID vaccine program

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research ◽

10.1186/s13584-021-00452-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Gary L. Freed

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Local Health ◽

National Strategy ◽

Individual State ◽

Health Departments ◽

Local Health Departments ◽

Public Health Infrastructure ◽

Health Infrastructure ◽

The Us ◽

Vaccine Distribution

AbstractWhen attempting to provide lessons for other countries from the successful Israeli COVID-19 vaccine experience, it is important to distinguish between the modifiable and non-modifiable components identified in the article by Rosen, et al. Two specific modifiable components included in the Israeli program from which the US can learn are (a) a national (not individual state-based) strategy for vaccine distribution and administration and (b) a functioning public health infrastructure. As a federal government, the US maintains an often complex web of state and national authorities and responsibilities. The federal government assumed responsibility for the ordering, payment and procurement of COVID vaccine from manufacturers. In designing the subsequent steps in their COVID-19 vaccine distribution and administration plan, the Trump administration decided to rely on the states themselves to determine how best to implement guidance provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This strategy resulted in 50 different plans and 50 different systems for the dissemination of vaccine doses, all at the level of each individual state. State health departments were neither financed, experienced nor uniformly possessed the expertise to develop and implement such plans. A national strategy for the distribution, and the workforce for the provision, of vaccine beyond the state level, similar to that which occurred in Israel, would have provided for greater efficiency and coordination across the country. The US public health infrastructure was ill-prepared and ill-staffed to take on the responsibility to deliver > 450 million doses of vaccine in an expeditious fashion, even if supply of vaccine was available. The failure to adequately invest in public health has been ubiquitous across the nation at all levels of government. Since the 2008 recession, state and local health departments have lost > 38,000 jobs and spending for state public health departments has dropped by 16% per capita and spending for local health departments has fallen by 18%. Hopefully, COVID-19 will be a wakeup call to the US with regard to the need for both a national strategy to address public health emergencies and the well-maintained infrastructure to make it happen.

Download Full-text

Public Health Surveillance and Infectious Disease Detection

Biosecurity and Bioterrorism Biodefense Strategy Practice and Science ◽

10.1089/bsp.2011.0088 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 6-16 ◽

Cited By ~ 67

Author(s):

Stephen S. Morse

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Infectious Disease ◽

Public Health Surveillance ◽

Health Surveillance ◽

Disease Detection

Download Full-text

Application for Public Health Accreditation Among US Local Health Departments in 2013 to 2019: Impact of Service and Activity Mix

American Journal of Public Health ◽

10.2105/ajph.2020.306007 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. e1-e8

Author(s):

Jonathon P. Leider ◽

Jessica Kronstadt ◽

Valerie A. Yeager ◽

Kellie Hall ◽

Chelsey K. Saari ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

United States ◽

Latent Class ◽

The United States ◽

Local Health ◽

Health Departments ◽

Local Health Departments ◽

Profile Data ◽

The Public ◽

Funding Support

Objectives. To examine correlates of applying for accreditation among small local health departments (LHDs) in the United States through 2019. Methods. We used administrative data from the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB) and 2013, 2016, and 2019 Profile data from the National Association of County and City Health Officials to examine correlates of applying for PHAB accreditation. We fit a latent class analysis (LCA) to characterize LHDs by service mix and size. We made bivariate comparisons using the t test and Pearson χ2. Results. By the end of 2019, 126 small LHDs had applied for accreditation (8%). When we compared reasons for not pursuing accreditation, we observed a difference by size for perceptions that standards exceeded LHD capacity (47% for small vs 22% for midsized [P < .001] and 0% for large [P < .001]). Conclusions. Greater funding support, considering differing standards by LHD size, and recognition that service mix might affect practicality of accreditation are all relevant considerations in attempting to increase uptake of accreditation for small LHDs. Public Health Implications. Overall, small LHDs represented about 60% of all LHDs that had not yet applied to PHAB. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print December 22, 2020: e1–e8. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.306007 )

Download Full-text