Local and State Collaboration for Effective Preparedness Planning

Abstract

State and local collaboration is critical to effective preparedness and response planning. Through various assessments, the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) is tracking the way in which local and state public health agencies are coordinating their planning efforts to ensure adequate bioterrorism and emergency response capacities. NACCHO's analysis of planning provides a case study of effective and ineffective collaboration. NACCHO intends to share these lessons to provide local and state public health agencies with strategies for enhancing collaboration in the future.

Regionalization of Local Public Health Systems in the Era of Preparedness

“…Some experts note that the high fixed costs associated with many public health functions present ongoing challenges for small health jurisdictions (2,22). Adopting a regional approach could improve efficiency, offering opportunities to avoid duplication, share resources, coordinate efforts with state authorities, and achieve consistency at local, regional, and state levels (2,22).…”

Are Public Health Workers Aware of What They Don't Know?

“…Guided by the work of Gebbie and Merrill, 2 the studies evaluate knowledge of the core competencies, wording the items in general terms. [3][4][5] For example, a survey item may ask workers how confident they are that they can describe the local command structure. This current practice has two advantages: (1) the same survey can be used in different locations, thus saving costs, and (2) the perceived needs of the workers can be assessed.…”

The Impact of Federal Bioterrorism Funding Programs on Local Health Department Preparedness Activities

“…Mixed evidence exists over whether federal expenditures have an impact on the performance of local public health systems and agencies. A 2004 survey by the National Association of County and City Health Officers (NACCHO) regarding federal grants to support bioterrorism activities concluded that federal bioterrorism 96 96 Evaluation & the Health Professions funds had supported the improvement of preparedness levels, but the study was based on a small sample and did not directly link funding to the level of preparedness activities (Bashir, Lafronza, Fraser, Brown, & Cope, 2003). As a cautionary contrast, Scutchfield and colleagues found little impact of budget level on local public health system performance in general (Scutchfield, Knight, Kelly, Bhandari, & Vasilescu, 2004).…”