scholarly journals Administrative Preparedness Strategies: Expediting Procurement and Contracting Cycle Times During an Emergency

2017 ◽  
Vol 132 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-297
Author(s):  
David Hurst ◽  
Sharon Sharpe ◽  
Valerie A. Yeager

We assessed whether administrative preparedness processes that were intended to expedite the acquisition of goods and services during a public health emergency affect estimated procurement and contracting cycle times. We obtained data from 2014-2015 applications to the Hospital Preparedness Program and Public Health Emergency Preparedness (HPP-PHEP) cooperative agreements. We compared the estimated procurement and contracting cycle times of 61 HPP-PHEP awardees that did and did not have certain administrative processes in place. Certain processes, such as statutes allowing for procuring and contracting on the open market, had an effect on reducing the estimated cycle times for obtaining goods and services. Other processes, such as cooperative purchasing agreements, also had an effect on estimated procurement time. For example, awardees with statutes that permitted them to obtain goods and services in the open market had an average procurement cycle time of 6 days; those without such statutes had a cycle time of 17 days ( P = .04). PHEP awardees should consider adopting these or similar processes in an effort to reduce cycle times.

Author(s):  
Daniel J. Barnett ◽  
Lauren Knieser ◽  
Nicole A. Errett ◽  
Andrew J. Rosenblum ◽  
Meena Seshamani ◽  
...  

Abstract The national response to the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted critical weaknesses in domestic health care and public health emergency preparedness despite nearly two decades of federal funding for multiple programs designed to encourage cross-cutting collaboration in emergency response. Health care coalitions (HCCs), which are funded through the Hospital Preparedness Program, were first piloted in 2007 and have been continuously funded nationwide since 2012 to support broad collaborations across public health, emergency management, emergency medical services, and the emergency response arms of the health care system within a geographical area. This commentary provides a SWOT analysis to summarize the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to the current HCC model against the backdrop of COVID-19. We close with concrete recommendations for better leveraging the HCC model for improved health care system readiness. These include better evaluating the role of HCCs and their members (including the responsibility of the HCC to better communicate and align with other sectors), reconsidering the existing framework for HCC administration, increasing incentives for meaningful community participation in HCC preparedness, and supporting next-generation development of health care preparedness systems for future pandemics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and irrefutable evidence may be lacking. The process of including evidence in public health decision-making and for evidence-informed policy, in preparation, and during public health emergencies, is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absences of shared tools and approaches for evidence-based preparedness and response planning. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability and to implement coordinated evidence-based response plans. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. As a multidisciplinary, standardized and evidence-based decision-making tool, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) represents and approach that can inform public health emergency preparedness and response planning processes; it can also provide meaningful insights on existing preparedness structures, working as bridge between scientists and decision-makers, easing knowledge transition and translation to ensure that evidence is effectively integrated into decision-making contexts. HTA can address the link between scientific evidence and decision-making in public health emergencies, and overcome the key challenges faced by public health experts when advising decision makers, including strengthening and accelerating knowledge transfer through rapid HTA, improving networking between actors and disciplines. It may allow a 360° perspective, providing a comprehensive view to decision-making in preparation and during public health emergencies. The objective of the workshop is to explore and present how HTA can be used as a shared and systematic evidence-based tool for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response, in order to enable stakeholders and decision makers taking actions based on the best available evidence through a process which is systematic and transparent. Key messages There are many barriers and no shared mechanisms to bring evidence in decision-making during public health emergencies. HTA can represent the tool to bring evidence-informed actions in public health emergency preparedness and response.


2017 ◽  
Vol 107 (S2) ◽  
pp. S117-S117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Nonkin Avchen ◽  
Tanya Telfair LeBlanc ◽  
Christine Kosmos

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 13-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Limpakarnjanarat ◽  
Rw Linkins ◽  
E Emerson ◽  
WL Aldis ◽  
C Jiraphongsa ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document