Development of a Research Agenda Focused on Academic Health Departments.

An academic health department (AHD) is a formal partnership between an academic institution and a governmental public health agency. Case studies have described the value of individual AHDs in the areas of student engagement, practice-based research, workforce development, and service. With growing interest in AHDs and the increasing importance of academic-practice linkages in both academic programs' and public health agencies' accreditation processes, articulating a research agenda focused on the AHD model can be useful for stimulating the research and practice fields to further develop the evidence base for AHDs. We provide a research agenda, developed through an iterative process involving academicians, practitioners, and others interested in academic-practice linkages.

Characteristics of Academic Health Departments: Initial Findings From a Cross-Sectional Survey.

Academic Health Departments (AHDs) represent collaborative relationships between public health academia and practice. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of AHD characteristics, to document the extent of collaboration between organizations in an AHD, and to explore the benefits of AHDs. An electronic survey on the AHD was sent to members of the AHD Learning Community--a virtual learning community with 338 members. There were 110 valid responses to the survey, with 65 indicating they were currently in an AHD partnership. Thirty-two percent of AHDs had been established for more than 10 years; 64% were engaged in joint research activities; and, while 92% of respondents placed a high value on improving the competencies of students, almost half placed a high value on improving the competencies of faculty. This study can be a springboard for further research on the impact of AHDs on practice, academia, and ultimately community health.

The Academic Health Department: the process of maturation.

The Academic Health Department (AHD) involves an arrangement between a governmental health agency and an academic institution, which provides mutual benefits in teaching, service, research, and practice. From its initial development in the mid-1980s as the public health equivalent of the relationship between a teaching hospital and a medical school, the AHD concept has evolved to include multiple levels of governmental public health agencies (local, state, and federal) as well as multiple academic institutions (public health, medicine, and primary care medical residencies). Throughout the decade of the 2000s, multiple influences have impacted both the quality and quantity of AHDs, leading to an expansion of AHDs through the Council on Linkages' AHD Learning Community. The value of the AHD--as described from prior studies as well as the AHD case examples in this current special issue--is evident in its impact on the quality of educational experiences and workforce development, agency and academic accreditation, practice-based research, and the potential to influence health reform.

Implications of preparedness and response core competencies for public health.

Public health care practitioners and organizations are a part of community readiness for, response to, and recovery from emergencies and disasters of all kinds. Although response to health threats, particularly communicable disease outbreaks, have long been a part of public health practice, 2 advancements in preparedness, including the integration of public health into the broader community emergency response system and the clarification of exactly what knowledge, skills, and attitudes a public health professional brings to the response, have been made since 2001. This article presents the newly affirmed core competencies to be attained and maintained by the majority of the public health workforce and discusses some of the many ways in which these competencies influence practice, research, and education.

The curious case of Cuba.

As health professionals in the United States consider how to focus health care and coverage to ensure better, more equitable patient and population health outcomes, the experience of Cuba's National Health System over the last 5 decades may provide useful insights. Although mutual awareness has been limited by long-term political hostilities between the United States and Cuban governments, the history and details of the Cuban health system indicate that their health system merits attention as an example of a national integrated approach resulting in improved health status. More extensive analysis of the principles, practices, and outcomes in Cuba is warranted to inform health system transformation in the United States, despite differences in political-social systems and available resources.

Health Equity, Cuban Style.

The United States has not yet decided to ensure that every citizen has access to health care services at reasonable cost. The United States spends more on health care than any other country by far. Yet the health status of the US population, when compared with that of like nations, remains poor. The US system does not operate efficiently, fares poorly in terms of health equity, and has an illness and injury care industry with many uncoordinated "systems" focused on treating individuals rather than on improving health status. There are lessons for us in Cuba's health system.

Public health preparedness and response competency model methodology.

OBJECTIVE: The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act calls for establishing a competency-based training program to train public health practitioners. To inform such training, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Schools of Public Health managed groups of experts to produce a competency model which could function as a national standard of behaviorally based, observable skills for the public health workforce to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from all hazards. DESIGN: A systematic review of existing competency models generated a competency model of proposed domains and competencies. PARTICIPANTS: National stakeholders were engaged to obtain consensus through a three-stage Delphi-like process. RESULTS: The Delphi-like process achieved 84 percent, 82 percent, and 79 percent response rates in its three stages. Three hundred sixty six unique individuals responded to the three-round process, with 45 percent (n = 166) responding to all three rounds. The resulting competency model features 18 competencies within four core learning domains targeted at midlevel public health workers. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners and academics have adopted the Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model, some of whom have formed workgroups to develop curricula based on the model. Efforts will be needed to develop evaluation materials for training and education programs to refine the model as well as for future training and education initiatives.

Academic health centers and public health departments: partnership matters.

BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine has called for increased population-based training for healthcare professions students, and particularly medical students. For this to be effective, students should receive such training in the locations where population-based approaches to care take place, such as public health departments (HDs). However, little is known about currently existing relationships between academic health centers (AHCs) and HDs. METHODS: During the spring and summer of 2003, e-mail surveys on this topic were sent to the 104 members of the Association of Academic Health Centers, and 500 members of the National Association of City and County Health Officers and the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers. Results were received from 50 AHCs and 201 HDs. RESULTS: Survey results suggest that large numbers of healthcare professions students--residents, medical students, and others--are currently being trained in many HDs nationwide. The web of relationships between AHCs and HDs extends beyond education into research, service, and other purposes. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results require verification. Nevertheless, they raise questions about the types and quality of the education being offered in health departments, the impact of AHC/HD relationships on both parties, and how existing relationships may be enhanced to meet current and future national needs.

Public health preparedness and response competency model methodology.

OBJECTIVE: The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act calls for establishing a competency-based training program to train public health practitioners. To inform such training, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Association of Schools of Public Health managed groups of experts to produce a competency model which could function as a national standard of behaviorally based, observable skills for the public health workforce to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from all hazards. DESIGN: A systematic review of existing competency models generated a competency model of proposed domains and competencies. PARTICIPANTS: National stakeholders were engaged to obtain consensus through a three-stage Delphi-like process. RESULTS: The Delphi-like process achieved 84 percent, 82 percent, and 79 percent response rates in its three stages. Three hundred sixty six unique individuals responded to the three-round process, with 45 percent (n = 166) responding to all three rounds. The resulting competency model features 18 competencies within four core learning domains targeted at midlevel public health workers. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners and academics have adopted the Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model, some of whom have formed workgroups to develop curricula based on the model. Efforts will be needed to develop evaluation materials for training and education programs to refine the model as well as for future training and education initiatives.