Northern Nevada Public Health: Utilizing the Public Health Workforce Calculator and Workforce Capacity Self-assessment Tools to Develop a Framework for Workforce Investment.

CONTEXT: Health departments nationally are critically understaffed and lack infrastructure support. By examining current staffing and allocations through a Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS) lens at the Northern Nevada Public Health (NNPH), there is an opportunity to make a strong case for greater investment if current dedicated full-time equivalents are inadequate and to guide which investments in public health workforce are prioritized. OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of the Public Health Workforce Calculator (calculator) and other tools to identify and prioritize FPHS workforce needs in a field application. DESIGN: Field application of the calculator in conjunction with the use of FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment tools. SETTING: NNPH. PARTICIPANTS: NNPH and Public Health Foundation (PHF). INTERVENTION: From June 2022 through April 2023, PHF collaborated with NNPH, serving Washoe County, to provide expertise and assistance as NNPH undertook an assessment of its workforce needs based upon the FPHS model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of the calculator output with FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment tools. RESULTS: The calculator and the FPHS capacity self-assessment process yielded complementary FPHS workforce capacity gap data. The use of a structured and transparent process, coupled with additional tools that included prioritizing needs, provided a viable and sustainable process for public health workforce investment planning. NNPH successfully utilized the results to bolster a supplemental funding request and a state public health appropriation. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the calculator and an FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment in a facilitated and structured process such as that used by NNPH to identify staffing priorities may hold promise as an approach that could be used to support decision-making and justification for infrastructure resources when funding for public health increases in the future.

Developing Complex, Cross-Cutting Skills in the Public Health Workforce: Using a Crosswalk Analysis to Map Public Health Competencies to Strategic Skills for the Governmental Public Health Workforce.

In recent years, many public health organizations have used 2 frameworks for workforce development planning and action: the Core Competencies for Public Health Professionals (Core Competencies) and the Strategic Skills for the Governmental Public Health Workforce (Strategic Skills). A third framework is also available for organizations emphasizing population health: the Competencies for Population Health Professionals (Population Health Competencies). This crosswalk analysis-conducted by the Public Health Foundation with input from the Region 2 Public Health Training Center and the de Beaumont Foundation-harmonizes these 3 schemas by systematically mapping the 2014 version of the Core Competencies and the 2019 Population Health Competencies with the 2017 version of the Strategic Skills to produce a comprehensive matrix depicting their relationships. When developing training and curricula, health department personnel and academic faculty can use the results to identify competencies public health professionals may wish to master to build the Strategic Skills. Organizations can also replicate the analytic methodology to align the Core Competencies with other sets of strategic priorities.

Why Do People Work in Public Health? Exploring Recruitment and Retention Among Public Health Workers.

CONTEXT: The public health workforce is critical to the functioning of the public health system and protection of the population's health. Ensuring a sufficient workforce depends on effectively recruiting and retaining workers. OBJECTIVE: This study examines factors influencing decisions to take and remain in jobs within public health, particularly for workers employed in governmental public health. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study employed a secondary data set from a 2010 national survey of US public health workers. PARTICIPANTS: Survey respondents were included in this study if they responded to at least 1 survey item related to recruitment and retention. A total of 10 859 survey responses fit this criterion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data examined demographics of public health workers and factors that influenced decisions to take jobs in and remain in public health. RESULTS: Job security (ß = 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.56) and competitive benefits (ß = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.28-0.70) were significantly and positively associated with governmental employees' decisions to take positions with their current employers compared with public health workers employed by other types of organizations. The same finding held with regard to retention: job security (ß = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.57) and competitive benefits (ß = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.24-0.83). Two personal factors, personal commitment to public service (ß = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.42) and wanted a job in the public health field (ß = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.18-0.69), were significantly and positively related to governmental employees deciding to remain with their current employers. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to recognize the value of competitive benefits for both current and potential employees. Public health agencies should maintain these if possible and make the value of these benefits known to policy makers or other agencies setting these benefit policies. Job security associated with governmental public health jobs also appears to offer public health an advantage in recruiting and retaining employees.

What Matters in Recruiting Public Health Employees: Considerations for Filling Workforce Gaps.

We examined factors that influence the decision to join the public health workforce. In this cross-sectional study, we used 2010 secondary data representing 6939 public health workers. Factors influencing the decision to take jobs in public health were significantly associated with specific previous employment settings. Respondents generally rated organizational factors as more influential than personal factors in terms of their decision to work in governmental public health. Leaders should consider tailoring recruitment efforts to maximize job uptake and enhance the potential for long-term retention.

Turning point revisited: launching the next generation of performance management in public health.

A decade ago, the Turning Point Performance Management Excellence Collaborative (Turning Point) developed the first public health-specific performance management (PM) system, with accompanying resource materials, assisted by the Public Health Foundation. Since then, dramatic advancements in PM and quality improvement activities have occurred in public health. Public Health Foundation gathered data that revealed Turning Point was still relevant but difficult to implement within public health. To reflect recent advances and current challenges, Public Health Foundation refreshed the Turning Point model and related guidance tools and developed new resources to facilitate PM implementation. In addition, a new fifth component, "Visible Leadership," was added to the 4-quadrant model and the Self-Assessment Tool. In the future, public health organizations should take an active leadership role in innovating and sustaining PM systems, ensuring they become accountable for producing outcomes, leveraging technology advances, and incorporating best practices from all stakeholders.

Prioritizing Workforce Development Training in State Health Departments Using TRAIN: Challenges and Opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were (1) to obtain data on the current status of public health workforce training and the use of the Training Finder Real-Time Affiliate Network (TRAIN), a public health learning management platform, in state health departments, and (2) to use the data to identify organizational features that might be affecting training and to determine barriers to and opportunities for improving training. METHODS: We conducted structured interviews in 2014 with TRAIN administrators and performance improvement managers (n = 14) from 7 state health departments that were using TRAIN to determine training practices and barriers to training. We determined key organizational features of the 7 agencies, including training structure, required training, TRAIN administrators' employment status (full time or part time), barriers to the use and tracking of core competencies in TRAIN, training needs assessment methods, leadership support of training and staff development, and agency interest in applying for Public Health Accreditation Board accreditation. RESULTS: We identified 4 common elements among TRAIN-affiliated state health departments: (1) underuse of TRAIN as a training tool, (2) inadequate ownership of training within the organization, (3) insufficient valuation of and budgeting for training, and (4) emerging collaboration and changing perceptions about training stimulated by agency preparation for accreditation. CONCLUSIONS: Public health leaders can increase buy-in to the importance of training by giving responsibility for training to a person, centralizing training, and setting expectations for the newly responsible training leader to update training policy and require the use of TRAIN to develop, implement, evaluate, monitor, and report on agency-wide training.

Use of peer groupings to assess county public health status.

INTRODUCTION: The Community Health Status Indicators Project was undertaken to produce county-specific reports assessing the status of community health for local jurisdictions throughout the United States. To accomplish this assessment, the Community Health Status Indicators Project team selected peer groupings of counties to monitor and analyze the health of local communities relative to peer communities. METHODS: To identify peer counties, the project team used 5 categorical county demographic variables, a specified order for applying criteria, and a predetermined target for peer grouping size to subdivide counties into homogeneous subgroups called peer groupings. RESULTS: Eighty-eight peer groupings were developed with 14-58 counties in each. The average size of each peer grouping was 35 counties. All peer groupings included counties representing at least 6 states. DISCUSSION: Peer groupings are very useful for community health assessment. They convey the range of health status indicator values for similar counties, serve as a basis for expected numbers of reportable diseases, and provide a method for comparing communities with peer and U.S. medians. To maintain their usefulness, peer groupings must be updated periodically.

Community health status indicators project: the development of a national approach to community health.

The Community Health Status Indicators Project (CHSI) 2008 provides 16-page reports for the 3141 counties in the United States, each of which includes more than 300 county-specific data items related to chronic and infectious diseases, birth characteristics or outcomes, causes of death, environmental health, availability of health services, behavioral risk factors, health-related quality of life, vulnerable populations, summary measures of health, and health disparities. The CHSI, originally initiated in 2000, provides county-level health profiles for all U.S. counties so that programs addressing community health can readily access community health indicators. Each county report also permits comparisons of a county's health status with similar "peer counties," with all counties, and with national Healthy People 2010 objectives. Under the leadership of a public-private partnership, the CHSI Steering Committee updated each county report and added new information and features to create CHSI 2008. This new CHSI version includes data for 1994 through 2006 from multiple surveillance systems. New features include an enhanced Web site, an Internet mapping application, and a downloadable database of the indicators for all counties.

A Performance Management Initiative for Local Health Department Vector Control Programs.

Local health department (LHD) vector control programs have experienced reductions in funding and capacity. Acknowledging this situation and its potential effect on the ability to respond to vector-borne diseases, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Public Health Foundation partnered on a performance management initiative for LHD vector control programs. The initiative involved 14 programs that conducted a performance assessment using the Environmental Public Health Performance Standards. The programs, assisted by quality improvement (QI) experts, used the assessment results to prioritize improvement areas that were addressed with QI projects intended to increase effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of services such as responding to mosquito complaints and educating the public about vector-borne disease prevention. This article describes the initiative as a process LHD vector control programs may adapt to meet their performance management needs. This study also reviews aggregate performance assessment results and QI projects, which may reveal common aspects of LHD vector control program performance and priority improvement areas. LHD vector control programs interested in performance assessment and improvement may benefit from engaging in an approach similar to this performance management initiative.

Local public health agency performance and community health status.

This study describes the results of an analysis of the relationship between local public health agency performance and health outcomes. Findings support the model that local public health agency performance affects community health status, and depending on the outcome, performance contributions vary. New hypotheses are offered that could help determine how system performance affects health outcomes.

Tracking our investments in public health: what have we learned?

A voluntary public health expenditures reporting system existed in the United States for over 25 years, tracking and reporting trends in health department expenditures, revenue streams, functions, and programs. Today, no such system exists and no data are available to help us understand how and where public health dollars are being spent and the trends during good and bad economic times. This article discusses the history of and lessons learned from the former public health expenditures reporting system and more recent demonstration projects that experimented with reporting by essential public health services. The article also explores how what we have learned can be used for developing and implementing a system today to meet public health and public policy needs.

Community readiness to meet Healthy People 2010 targets.

Healthy People 2010 national objectives seek to engage public health systems in health improvement. Focusing on "healthy communities," the article describes the readiness of U.S. counties to meet targets and the technical assistance that may be needed. Using rate comparisons and trends, four readiness-to-improve health categories are calculated for nine mortality rates. Greatest readiness for improvement was found for coronary heart disease mortality, where the fewest jurisdictions (35%) were static, having neither met targets nor improved; least readiness (65%) was observed for colon and rectum cancer and suicide. Nevertheless, some counties (50-1,050) were exemplary, already meeting the target and still improving.