Risk in Healthcare Information Technology: Creating a Standardized Risk Assessment Framework

Data breaches are occurring at an unprecedented rate. Between June 2019 and early October 2020, over 564 data breaches affected over 36.6 million patients as posted to the United States Federal government HITECH portal. These patients are at risk for having their identities stolen or sold on alternative marketplaces. Some healthcare entities are working to manage privacy and security risks to their operations, research, and patients. However, many have some procedures and policies in place, with few (if any) centrally managing all their infrastructure risks. For example, many healthcare organizations are not tracking or updating all the known and potential concerns and elements into a centralized repository following industry best practice timetables for auditing and insurance quantification. This chapter examines known and potential problems in healthcare information technology and discusses a new open source risk management standardized framework library to improve the coordination and communication of the aforementioned problematic management components. The healthcare industry would benefit from adopting such a standardized risk-centric framework.

Incorporating Ethics in Disaster Communication Strategy: The Case of the U.S. Government in Deepwater Horizon

BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in April 2010 was a major test of the National Incident Management System (NIMS), which the United States federal government mandates for response to all disasters. At the time, this disaster was perhaps the greatest event in scope and duration under NIMS disaster management guidelines since they were revised in 2008 (the third edition was published in 2017). Ten years later, NIMS provides procedures for operating a joint information center (JIC), but still offers no guidelines for ethical communication. This case study examines the ethical implications of 178 news releases distributed by the Deepwater Horizon Incident JIC. Qualitative analysis found that communication was conducted in an open, ethical manner, with few exceptions. Conflicts emerged, however, that may have compromised ethical standards. The authors conclude with recommendations to inform ethical decision making by JIC communicators.

Federal Quarantine: The Issue with Limited CDC Presence at Ports of Entry

The United States Federal government faces significant difficulties when implementing federal quarantine. States have the jurisdiction to enforce quarantine within their states, and the federal government cannot infringe on this right. The issue therein lies in the places and modality in which the federal government may enforce quarantine. This Article aims to outline the places and methods by which quarantine is enforced by the federal government, the problems that arise from this limited jurisdiction, and solutions that ensure federal quarantine is meaningful.

What industries received COVID-19 closure orders? A cross-state comparison in the US

The United States federal government developed a COVID-19 blueprint for states to follow; it included the issuance by state/local governments of “stay at home” orders coupled with lists of essential services. Suppliers of these services would be exempt from closure so their workers could fulfill their essential functions. The blueprint was embraced by the states in a variety of ways. In this paper, we identify how business closure rules were enacted across the states for each of 15 types of services. The outcome measures were: “open” “open with restrictions” and “closure”. For six business types, most states permitted businesses to open. In four types, businesses were mainly closed. In three, they were allowed to open with restrictions. In the rest, there was a mixture of outcomes. In sum, the federal blueprint resulted in a regulatory patchwork as it spread throughout the country.

Capacity of United States federal government and its partners to rapidly and accurately report the identity (taxonomy) of non-native organisms intercepted in early detection programs

The early detection of and rapid response to invasive species (EDRR) depends on accurate and rapid identification of non-native species. The 2016–2018 National Invasive Species Council Management Plan called for an assessment of US government (federal) capacity to report on the identity of non-native organisms intercepted through early detection programs. This paper serves as the response to that action item. Here we summarize survey-based findings and make recommendations for improving the federal government’s capacity to identify non-native species authoritatively in a timely manner. We conclude with recommendations to improve accurate identification within the context of EDRR by increasing coordination, maintaining taxonomic expertise, creating an identification tools clearinghouse, developing and using taxonomic standards for naming and identification protocols, expanding the content of DNA and DNA Barcode libraries, ensuring long-term sustainability of biological collections, and engaging and empowering citizens and citizen science groups.