Planning to Reduce the Health Impacts of Extreme Heat: A Content Analysis of Heat Action Plans in Local United States Jurisdictions.

Objectives. To examine commonalities and gaps in the content of local US heat action plans (HAPs) designed to decrease the adverse health effects of extreme heat. Methods. We used content analysis to identify common strategies and gaps in extreme heat preparedness among written HAPs in the United States from jurisdictions that serve municipalities with more than 200 000 residents. We reviewed, coded, and analyzed plans to assess the prevalence of key components and strategies. Results. All 21 plans evaluated incorporated data on activation triggers, heat health messaging and risk communication, cooling centers, surveillance activities, and agency coordination, and 95% incorporated information on outreach to at-risk populations. Gaps existed in the specific applications of these broad strategies. Conclusions. Practice-based recommendations as well as future areas of research should focus on increasing targeted strategies for at-risk individuals and expanding the use of surveillance data outside of situational awareness. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(5):559-567. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307217).

Barriers and facilitators to state public health agency climate and health action: a qualitative assessment.

BACKGROUND: As the health implications of climate change become more apparent, agencies and institutions across the United States are developing recommendations for state and territorial health agencies (S/THAs) to implement evidence-informed climate and health adaptation strategies. The CDC established the Building Resilience Against Climate Effects (BRACE) framework in 2010 to encourage local and state public health engagement in climate change adaptation. However, even after a decade of the BRACE initiative, the elements that affect the adoption and implementation of climate and health programming by S/THAs are not well understood. METHODS: Using an implementation science framework, this study sought to further understand and define the barriers and facilitators that determine the breadth and success of climate change and health activities undertaken by state health agencies (SHAs). We conducted focus groups with representatives from SHAs with and without climate and health programs, and analyzed data using the framework method for qualitative research. RESULTS: This study identified funding, state and agency-level prioritization, staff capability and capacity, and political will and polarization as factors that influence the readiness for implementation and implementation climate for climate and health activities. CONCLUSIONS: As the impacts of climate change intensify, S/THAs will need to expand resources and capacity, and seek advocacy and assistance from external organizations in order to support the level of engagement required to strengthen climate resilience. Findings from this study have implications for public health policy and highlight potential pathways to expand support for climate and health activities in S/THAs in the U.S.

Survey of extreme heat public health preparedness plans and response activities in the most populous jurisdictions in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly frequent and intense extreme heat events (EHEs) are indicative of climate change impacts, and urban areas' social and built environments increase their risk for health consequences. Heat action plans (HAPs) are a strategy to bolster municipal EHE preparedness. The objective of this research is to characterize municipal interventions to EHEs and compare U.S. jurisdictions with and without formal heat action plans. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 99 U.S. jurisdictions with populations > 200,000 between September 2021 and January 2022. Summary statistics were calculated to describe the proportion of total jurisdictions, as well as jurisdictions with and without HAPs and in different geographies that reported engagement in extreme heat preparedness and response activities. RESULTS: Thirty-eight (38.4%) jurisdictions responded to the survey. Of those respondents, twenty-three (60.5%) reported the development of a HAP, of which 22 (95.7%) reported plans for opening cooling centers. All respondents reported conducting heat-related risk communications; however, communication approaches focused on passive, technology-dependent mechanisms. While 75.7% of jurisdictions reported having developed a definition for an EHE, less than two-thirds of responding jurisdictions reported any of the following activities: conducting heat-related surveillance (61.1%), implementing provisions for power outages (53.1%), increasing access to fans or air conditioners (48.4%), developing heat vulnerability maps (43.2%), or evaluating activities (34.2%). There were only two statistically significant (p ≥ .05) differences in the prevalence of heat-related activities between jurisdictions with and without a written HAP, possibly attributable to a relatively small sample size: surveillance and having a definition of extreme heat. CONCLUSIONS: Jurisdictions can strengthen their extreme heat preparedness by expanding their consideration of at-risk populations to include communities of color, conducting formal evaluations of their responses, and by bridging the gap between the populations determined to be most at-risk and the channels of communication designed to reach them.

Climate Change Adaptation Activities and Needs in US State and Territorial Health Agencies.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize US State and Territorial Health Agencies' (S/THA) climate change adaptation activities and priorities to facilitate appropriate investments, skills development, and support that will strengthen health sector capacity in response to a changing climate. DESIGN: In 2021, we conducted an online survey of S/THA staff requesting information on current activities related to climate change and health, the state of climate and health programming, and anticipated needs and priorities for assistance. We analyzed survey results using descriptive statistics. SETTING: US State and Territorial Health Agencies. PARTICIPANTS: We received responses from 41 of 59 S/THAs (69.5%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Implementation of S/THA climate and health programs (CHPs); engagement in climate and health activities; maintenance of hazard early warning systems and action plans; employment of climate and health communications strategies; capability to assess risks and adaptation needs related to various climate-sensitive conditions; priorities and plans for climate change adaptation in relation to climate-sensitive health risks; climate change adaptation-related partnerships and collaborations; requests of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) for advancing climate change adaptation activities; and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on climate change work. RESULTS: Nineteen S/THAs reported having CHPs, the majority of which are federally funded. On average, S/THAs without CHPs reported engagement in fewer climate and health activities and more early warning activities. The S/THAs reported the highest levels of concerns regarding non-vector-borne infectious disease (66%), vector-borne infectious diseases (61%), and extreme heat (61%) hazards. CONCLUSIONS: As S/THAs with CHPs report substantially greater climate and health capacity than those without, additional federal and state investments (eg, Building Resilience Against Climate Effects [BRACE]) are urgently needed to catalyze climate and health capacity.

Evaluating an equity-focused approach to assess climate resilience and disaster priorities through a community survey.

As the Duwamish Valley community in Seattle, Washington, U.S.A. and other environmental justice communities nationally contend with growing risks from climate change, there have been calls for a more community-centered approach to understanding impacts and priorities to inform resilience planning. To engage community members and identify climate justice and resilience priorities, a partnership of community leaders, government-based practitioners, and academics co-produced a survey instrument and collected data from the community using the Seattle Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (SASPER), an approach adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER). In addition, we conducted a process and outcome project evaluation using quantitative survey data collected from volunteers and qualitative semi-structured interviews with project team members. In October and November 2022, teams of volunteers from partner organizations collected 162 surveys from households in the Duwamish Valley. Poor air quality, extreme heat, and wildfires were among the highest reported hazards of concern. Most Duwamish Valley households agreed or strongly agreed that their neighborhood has a strong sense of community (64%) and that they have people nearby to call when they need help (69%). Forty-seven percent of households indicated willingness to get involved with resilience planning, and 62% of households said that they would use a Resilience Hub during an emergency. Survey volunteers evaluated their participation positively, with over 85% agreeing or strongly agreeing that they learned new skills, were prepared for the survey, and would participate in future assessments. The evaluation interviews underscored that while the SASPER may have demonstrated feasibility in a pre-disaster phase, CASPER may not meet all community/partner needs in the immediate disaster response phase because of its lack of focus on equity and logistical requirements. Future research should focus on identifying less resource intensive data collection approaches that maintain the rigor and reputation of CASPER while enabling a focus on equity.