Workforce development programs in public health should link improvements in workers' performance with improvements in their agencies' performance. The "ten essential services" of public health provide criteria for measuring both individual worker training (as in workforce competency standards) and agency performance (as in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Public Health Performance Standards Program). This shared foundation was the basis for a model strategic training program developed for use in a 500-employee urban county health department. Full implementation of this model as a foundation for assessment, curriculum development, and evaluation requires careful attention to management issues, confidentiality of employee records, and evaluation methodologies.
After fall 2001, scientists and professionals recognized the importance of integrating public health with traditional first-response professions in planning and training for disasters. However, operationalizing this approach among professionals in the field confronted barriers that were both inter-cultural and jurisdictional. The Pennsylvania Preparedness Leadership Institute (PPLI) is a collaboration of the Pennsylvania Department of Health and the University of Pittsburgh Center for Public Health Preparedness. Team members are recruited from public health, emergency medicine, emergency management, hospitals, and public safety agencies from each of nine multi-county regions in Pennsylvania. Each team takes on a year-long project that addresses a strategic problem as a focus for capacity-building within its region. Unexpectedly during PPLI's first year in operation, a hepatitis-A outbreak tested whether one regional team could successfully mount the necessary integrated response. This experience, as well as the planned evaluation for PPLI, demonstrated both the successful processes and the positive impact of this integrated leadership training initiative.
Privatization is part of a broader shift toward "managing" rather than directly providing public health services, yet privatization often reduces LHDs' control over the performance of services.
OBJECTIVE: This article summarizes the results of a descriptive qualitative study addressing the question, what are the information practices of the various professionals involved in disaster preparedness? We present key results, but focus on issues of choice and adaptation of models and theories for the study. METHODS: Primary and secondary literature on theory and models of information behavior were consulted. Taylor's Information Use Environments (IUE) model, Institutional Theory, and Dervin's SenseMaking metatheory were used in the design of an openended interview schedule. Twelve individual face-to-face interviews were conducted with disaster professionals drawn from the Pennsylvania Preparedness Leadership Institute (PPLI) scholars.Taylor's Information Use Environments (IUE) model served as a preliminary coding framework for the transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Disaster professionals varied in their use of libraries, peerreviewed literature, and information management techniques, but many practices were similar across professions, including heavy Internet and email use, satisficing, and preference for sources that are socially and physically accessible. CONCLUSIONS: The IUE model provided an excellent foundation for the coding scheme, but required modification to place the workplace in the larger social context of the current information society. It is not possible to confidently attribute all work-related information practices to professional culture. Differences in information practice observed may arise from professional training and organizational environment, while many similarities observed seem to arise from everyday information practices common to non-work settings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.