State-by-state update on laboratory capabilities and response readiness planning

"CDC has now published four preparedness reports to demonstrate how federal investments are improving the nation's ability to respond to public health threats and emergencies. This report is an update to CDC's 2010 state-by-state report; it presents available data that demonstrate trends and document progress in two important preparedness activities, laboratory capabilities and response readiness planning. These data do not represent all preparedness activities occurring in states and localities. As other data become available, they will be included in future reports."Background -- Key findings and moving forward -- Section 1: A National snapshot of public health preparedness activities -- Section 2: Public health preparedness activities in states and localities -- Appendix 1: Explanation of fact sheet data points -- Appendix 2: Cities readiness initiative technical assistance review scores -- EndnotesTitle from PDF title screen (CDC, viewed Sept. 20, 2011)."September 2011.""This report was developed by the Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (OPHPR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)"--back cover."Special thanks: Association of Public Health Laboratories, Association of Schools of Public Health, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, National Association of County and City Health Officials"--back cover.Mode of access: Internet. (Arobat .pdf file: 7.18 MB, 152 p. ).Includes bibliographical references (p. [149])

Public health workbook to define, locate and reach special, vulnerable, and at-risk populations in an emergency

"The capacity to reach every person in a community is one of the major goals for emergency preparedness and response. The goal of emergency health communication is to rapidly get the right information to the entire population so that they are able to make the right choices for their health and safety. To do this, a community must know what subgroups make up its population, where the people in these groups live and work, and how they best receive information. Although knowing this type of information might seem obvious, many jurisdictions have not yet begun the process to define or locate their at-risk populations. To maintain consistency with the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), this workbook uses the term "at-risk populations" to describe individuals or groups whose needs are not fully addressed by traditional service providers or who feel they cannot comfortably or safely use the standard resources offered during preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. These groups include people who are physically or mentally disabled (e.g., blind, deaf, hard-of-hearing, have learning disabilities, mental illness or mobility limitations), people with limited English language skills, geographically or culturally isolated people, homeless people, senior citizens, and children. Regardless of terminology, trust plays a critical role in reaching at-risk populations. Reaching people through trusted channels has shown to be much more effective than through mainstream channels. For some people, trusted information comes more readily from within their communities than from external sources. This document describes a process that will help planners to define, locate, and reach at-risk populations in an emergency. Additional tools are included to provide resources for more inclusive communication planning that will offer time-saving assistance for state, local, tribal, and territorial public health and emergency management planners in their efforts to reach at-risk populations in day-to-day communication and during emergency situations. If you follow the process outlined in this document, you will begin to develop a Community Outreach Information Network (COIN)--a grassroots network of people and trusted leaders who can help with emergency response planning and delivering information to at-risk populations in emergencies. Building a strong network of individuals who are invested in their community's well-being, who are prepared and willing to help, and who have the ability to respond in an emergency is just the start. You must also include network members in your emergency preparedness planning, test the capacity of your COIN to disseminate information through preparedness exercises, and make changes to your preparedness plans based on the evaluation of those exercises. "--p. 4.Introduction -- Purpose -- The Categories -- Economic Disadvantage -- Language and Literacy -- Medical Issues and Disability (physical, mental, cognitive, or sensory) -- Isolation (cultural, geographic, or social) -- Age -- -- Creating a Coin In Your Community -- Phase 1: Defining At-risk Populations -- Phase 2: Locating At-risk Populations -- Phase 3: Reaching At-risk Populations -- -- Next Steps -- -- Resource Guide -- Diversity in the United States -- Principles of Community Engagement -- Developing and Testing Messages for Cultural and Linguistic Competence -- Culturally CAPABLE: a Mnemonic for Developing Culturally Capable Materials -- Planning for Language Interpretation/Translation Services -- Community Health Workers -- Delivery Channels -- Regional Councils and Metropolitan Planning Organizations -- -- The Categories Checklist -- National information sources -- State information sources -- Category resources -- -- Resource Dictionary -- -- Templates -- Database template to develop your COIN -- Sample telephone survey template -- Build a digital map for your COIN: using free online software -- Questionnaire template/phone script -- Memorandum of understanding template -- Collaboration agreement letter template -- Focus group, interview, or roundtable discussion template -- Interview/survey template: learning from other organizations -- E-mail test template -- -- Inserts"CS211575-A."Mode of access: Internet. (Arobat .pdf file: 1.99 MB, 64 p.).Mode of access: World Wide Web as an Acrobat .pdf file (4.98 MB, 44 p.).Includes bibliographical references

Public health preparedness in Alberta: a systems-level study

BACKGROUND: Recent international and national events have brought critical attention to the Canadian public health system and how prepared the system is to respond to various types of contemporary public health threats. This article describes the study design and methods being used to conduct a systems-level analysis of public health preparedness in the province of Alberta, Canada. The project is being funded under the Health Research Fund, Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. METHODS/DESIGN: We use an embedded, multiple-case study design, integrating qualitative and quantitative methods to measure empirically the degree of inter-organizational coordination existing among public health agencies in Alberta, Canada. We situate our measures of inter-organizational network ties within a systems-level framework to assess the relative influence of inter-organizational ties, individual organizational attributes, and institutional environmental features on public health preparedness. The relative contribution of each component is examined for two potential public health threats: pandemic influenza and West Nile virus. DISCUSSION: The organizational dimensions of public health preparedness depend on a complex mix of individual organizational characteristics, inter-agency relationships, and institutional environmental factors. Our study is designed to discriminate among these different system components and assess the independent influence of each on the other, as well as the overall level of public health preparedness in Alberta. While all agree that competent organizations and functioning networks are important components of public health preparedness, this study is one of the first to use formal network analysis to study the role of inter-agency networks in the development of prepared public health systems

Strengthening CDC's emergency response

This brochure presents key findings from the CDC report, Public Health Preparedness: Strengthening CDC's Emergency Response. The key findings summarize FY 2007 TPER-funded public health preparedness accomplishments and priorities as CDC continues to strive toward its preparedness goal."January 2009."Also available via the World Wide Web as an Arobat .pdf file:( 2.1 MB, 8 p.

Public health preparedness : 2016 national snapshot

CDC plays a pivotal role in ensuring state and local public health systems are prepared to respond to all types of health threats. CDC\u2019s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (OPHPR) leads the agency\u2019s preparedness and response activities by providing strategic direction, support, and coordination for activities across CDC and with local, state, tribal, territorial, national, and international public health partners.+++This report highlights how OPHPR strengthens the nation\u2019s health security to save lives and protect against public health threats within the context of CDC\u2019s 2014 \u2013 2015 Ebola response and the agency\u2019s three overarching priorities:1. Improving health security at home and around the world2. Protecting people from public health threats3. Strengthening public health through collaborationCDC strategically invests in public health preparedness to improve the ability of federal, state, and local public health agencies to prepare for and respond to all types of public health threats. In fiscal year 2015 (FY15), Congress appropriated $1.35 billion to CDC for public health preparedness and response.CS257639-APublication date from document properties.2016_Preparedness_Report.pdf2014\u20132015 highlights -- Background -- 2014\u20132015 Ebola Response -- Priority 1: Improving health security -- Priority 2: Protecting people -- Priority 3: Strengthening collaboration -- Looking forward -- Fact sheets -- Appendix A: Emergency management program activities -- Appendix B: Explanation of fact sheet data points -- Appendix C: Fact sheet endnotes.2016736

National snapshot of public health preparedness

This report presents a snapshot of public health preparedness and response activities during 2013 and 2014. Information on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response (PHPR), as well as performance data for Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) cooperative agreement awardees, are highlighted throughout.Key accomplishments:\u2022 Due in large part to PHEP funding and other preparedness investments, the nation is better prepared to prevent and respond to public health emergencies now than before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.\u2022 Over the past 3 years PHEP awardees have improved capacity in nearly all high priority public health preparedness capabilities.\u2022 \u201e CDC improved health security by continuously monitoring health threats and preparing the country to be resilient when emergencies arise. During 2013, PHPR:\u2022 \ubb Triaged over 20,000 calls from clinicians, public health agencies, and the public to appropriate subject matter experts including epidemiologists, laboratorians, and biosafety experts.\u2022 \ubb Conducted two notification drills with PHEP awardees to test communication systems between CDC, laboratorians, and epidemiologists. Eighty-three percent of awardees met the 45-minute response time target in the first drill; 94% met the target in the second drill.\u2022 \ubb Engaged in 585 Emergency Management Program activities in the U.S. and abroad, including 200 exercises and activations in 28 countries.\u2022 During 2013,131 CDC field staff were assigned to 50 different PHEP awardee locations. These staff filled critical roles in epidemiology, medical countermeasure management, and technical assistance and were prepared if called upon to assist during public health emergencies.\u2022 PHPR improved collaborations with federal partners, such as the Department of Health and Human Services\u2019 Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; state and local public health departments; nongovernmental organizations; and other countries to prevent and respond to public health emergencies.CS28774-A, BExecutive summary -- Background -- Priority 1: Improving health security -- Priority 2: Protecting people -- Priority 3: Strengthening collaboration -- Looking forward -- Fact sheets -- Appendix A: Emergency management program activities -- Appendix B: Explanation of fact sheet data points -- Appendix C: Fact sheet endnotes.2015734

Temporal Trends in Local Public Health Preparedness Capacity

Local health departments (LHDs) are essential to emergency preparedness and response activities. Since 2005, LHD resources for preparedness, including personnel, are declining in the face of continuing gaps and variation in the performance of preparedness activities. The effect of these funding decreases on LHD preparedness performance is not well understood. This study examines the performance of preparedness capacities among NC LHDs and a matched national comparison group of LHDs over three years. We observe significant decreases in five of eight preparedness domains from three years of survey data collected from 2010 through 2012. Most notably, we observe significant decreases in the Surveillance & Investigation domain. Performance decreases may be a result of continued, compounding declines in preparedness funding

Public health preparedness : mobilizing state by state

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) works to support public health preparedness for all hazards, including natural, biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear events. This work falls under one of the agency's overarching health protection goals: "People prepared for emerging health threats - people in all communities will be protected from infectious, occupational, environmental, and terrorist threats." CDC's inaugural report on public health emergency preparedness highlights the progress that has been made in state and local preparedness and response, identifies preparedness challenges that public health departments face and outlines CDC's efforts to address those challenges. Designed to increase transparency and accountability regarding the country's investment in preparedness activities, the report presents aggregate data as well as state-specific snapshots for all 50 states and four directly funded localities: Washington, DC; Chicago; Los Angeles County; and New York City.Executive summary -- Background -- Methods -- Section 1: Public health preparedness in the states and DC -- -- Section 2: Snapshots of public health preparedness in states and directly funded localities -- -- Appendix 1: Cooperative agreement funding -- Appendix 2: DHS national preparedness guidelines and priorities -- Appendix 3: Overview of CDC preparedness activities -- Appendix 4: Overview of ASPR preparedness activities -- Appendix 5: Data sources and methods -- Appendix 6: Category A and B biological agents"February 2008"This report was developed by the Coordinating Office for Terrorism Preparedness and Emergency Response, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Project team: Diane Caves ... [et al.]Special thanks to Association of Schools of Public Health, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, Association of Public Health Laboratories, Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, National Association of County and City Health Officials.Presented Feb. 20, 2008 at the Public Health Preparedness Summit held Feb. 19-22 in Atlanta, GA.Mode of access: Internet. (Arobat .pdf file: 12.55 MB, 164 p.)