Development of the FlagIt Report and Response System for Concerning or Harassing Messages Related to Public Health Work.

In response to growing reports of concerning/harassing messages and backlash related to public health work, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health established the FlagIt report and response system. The system uses a dedicated FlagIt email inbox for faculty and staff to report harassing or concerning messages related to public-facing work and has an autoreply message sharing available institutional resources. The Johns Hopkins University public safety investigators review, inventory, and investigate the reported messages and share their findings with the reporter within 2 business days. In addition, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health faculty FlagIt team volunteers reach out to the reporter to check in on how they are doing and offer additional supports if needed The FlagIt system was developed with existing institutional resources and did not require additional funding. Given the continued backlash against public health, other public health institutions and agencies may consider implementing similar report and response systems.

Information Challenges Associated With Accessing and Sharing of Patient Information in Disasters: A Qualitative Analysis.

As disasters increase in frequency and severity, so too does the health impact on affected populations. Disasters exacerbate the already challenging health information-sharing landscape. A reduced capacity to access and share patient information may have negative impacts on providers' ability to care for patients individually and to address disaster health outcomes at the population level. Between October 2018 and July 2019, we conducted 21 semistructured interviews with physicians experienced in providing healthcare during disasters to understand the challenges related to patient information sharing in disaster responses. Key informants noted challenges with patient information management-including accessing, sharing, and transferring information-and that it was a barrier to providing effective clinical care in disasters. Three major areas were identified as challenges: (1) lack of systematic mechanisms for patient information sharing during disaster handoffs, (2) lack of access to a patient's past medical history, and (3) population-level impacts of patient information-sharing breakdowns in disasters. Reducing barriers to effective patient information sharing is a critical need during disasters. Requirements generally fall to overburdened clinicians, and novel solutions that ease this responsibility and leverage existing infrastructure should be explored. Work conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic may inform new solutions. Integrated approaches that support information sharing in real time will improve patient care at the individual level and can support operational improvements to current and future disaster responses.

A Systematic Review on Professional Regulation and Credentialing of Public Health Workforce.

The public health workforce (PHW) counts a great variety of professionals, and how services are delivered differs in every country. The complexity and the diversity of PHW professions also reflect structural problems of supply and demand of PHW in various organizations and health care systems. Therefore, credentialing, regulation, and formal recognition are essential for a competent and responsive PHW to address public health challenges. To ensure comparability of the credentialing and regulation systems for the PHW and to enable its collective action at the macro level in the event of a health crisis, we systematically analyzed documented evidence on the PHW. A systematic review was selected to answer the research questions: (1) what are the most effective aspects and characteristics in identified programs (standards or activities) in professional credentialing and regulation of the PHW and (2) what are common evidence-based aspects and characteristics for the performance standards to support a qualified and competent PHW? The identification of professional credentialing systems and available practices of the PHW was performed systematically using a systematic review of international resources in the specialized literature published in English. The PRISMA framework was used to verify the reporting of combined findings from three databases: Google Scholar (GS), PubMed (PM), and Web of Science (WoS). The original search covered the period from 2000 until 2022. Out of 4839 citations based on the initial search, 71 publications were included in our review. Most of the studies were conducted in the US, UK, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia; one study was conducted in an international context for professional credentialing and regulation of the PHW. The review presents specific professional regulation and credentialing approaches without favoring one of the proposed methods. Our review was limited to articles focused on professional credentialing and regulation of the PHW in the specialized literature published in English and did not include a review of primary PHW development sources from international organizations. The process and requirements are unique processes displaying knowledge, competencies, and expertise, regardless of the field of practice. Continuous education, self-regulatory, and evidence-based approach can be seen as common characteristics for the performance standards on both community and national levels. Certification and regulation standards should be based on competencies that are currently used in practice. Therefore, answering questions about what criteria would be used, what is the process operation, what educational background the candidate should have, re-examination, and training are essential for a competent and responsive PHW and could stimulate the motivation of the PHW.

The State of the US Public Health Workforce: Ongoing Challenges and Future Directions.

Between the 2009 Great Recession and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US state and local governmental public health workforce lost 40,000 jobs. Tens of thousands of workers also left during the pandemic and continue to leave. As governmental health departments are now receiving multimillion-dollar, temporary federal investments to replenish their workforce, this review synthesizes the evidence regarding major challenges that preceded the pandemic and remain now. These include the lack of the field's ability to readily enumerate and define the governmental public health workforce as well as challenges with the recruitment and retention of public health workers. This review finds that many workforce-related challenges identified more than 20 years ago persist in the field today. Thus, it is critical that we look back to be able to then move forward to successfully rebuild the workforce and assure adequate capacity to protect the public's health and respond to public health emergencies.

Trends in Degree Conferrals, Degree-Associated Debt, and Employment Outcomes Among Undergraduate Public Health Degree Graduates, 2001‒2020.

Objectives. To characterize the trends in degree conferrals, degree-associated debt, and employment outcomes among undergraduate public health degree (UGPHD) graduates. Methods. We reported administrative data on degree conferrals from 2001 to 2020 from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). For alumni graduating from 2015 to 2019, we also reported degree-associated debt and earnings 1 year after graduation compiled by NCES. Finally, we utilized a data set on 1-year postgraduation employment outcomes for graduates from 2015 to 2020 from the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Results. As of 2020, more than 18 000 UGPHDs were awarded each year, more than 140 000 in total over the past 20 years. UGPHD graduates are highly diverse, with more than 80% being women and 55% being individuals from communities of color. We find alumni worked mostly in for-profit organizations (34%), health care (28%), nonprofits (11%), academic organizations (10%), government (10%), and other (6%). Degree-associated debt was $24 000, and the median first-year earnings were $34 000. Conclusions. While growth in UGPHD conferrals has slowed, it remains among the fastest-growing degree in the nation. However, the limited pathways into government remains a significant challenge. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(1):115-123. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307113).

Pandemic-Related Workplace Violence and Its Impact on Public Health Officials, March 2020‒January 2021.

Objectives. To characterize the experience and impact of pandemic-related workplace violence in the form of harassment and threats against public health officials. Methods. We used a mixed methods approach, combining media content and a national survey of local health departments (LHDs) in the United States, to identify harassment against public health officials from March 2020 to January 2021. We compared media-portrayed experiences, survey-reported experiences, and publicly reported position departures. Results. At least 1499 harassment experiences were identified by LHD survey respondents, representing 57% of responding departments. We also identified 222 position departures by public health officials nationally, 36% alongside reports of harassment. Public health officials described experiencing structural and political undermining of their professional duties, marginalization of their expertise, social villainization, and disillusionment. Many affected leaders remain in their positions. Conclusions. Interventions to reduce undermining, ostracizing, and intimidating acts against health officials are needed for a sustainable public health system. We recommend training leaders to respond to political conflict, improving colleague support networks, providing trauma-informed worker support, investing in long-term public health staffing and infrastructure, and establishing workplace violence reporting systems and legal protections. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(5):736-746. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306649).

Past local government health spending was not correlated with COVID-19 control in US counties.

CONTEXT: Wide variation in state and county health spending prior to 2020 enables tests of whether historically better state and locally funded counties achieved faster control over COVID-19 in the first 6 months of the pandemic in the Unites States prior to federal supplemental funding. OBJECTIVE: We used time-to-event and generalized linear models to examine the association between pre-pandemic state-level public health spending, county-level non-hospital health spending, and effective COVID-19 control at the county level. We include 2,775 counties that reported 10 or more COVID-19 cases between January 22, 2020, and July 19, 2020, in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Control of COVID-19 was defined by: (i) elapsed time in days between the 10th case and the day of peak incidence of a county's local epidemic, among counties that bent their case curves, and (ii) doubling time of case counts within the first 30 days of a county's local epidemic for all counties that reported 10 or more cases. RESULTS: Only 26% of eligible counties had bent their case curve in the first 6 months of the pandemic. Government health spending at the county level was not associated with better COVID-19 control in terms of either a shorter time to peak in survival analyses, or doubling time in generalized linear models. State-level public spending on hazard preparation and response was associated with a shorter time to peak among counties that were able to bend their case incidence curves. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing resource availability for public health in local jurisdictions without thoughtful attention to bolstering the foundational capabilities inside health departments is unlikely to be sufficient to prepare the country for future outbreaks or other public health emergencies.

Regarding Investment in a Healthier Future: Impact of the 2012 Institute of Medicine Finance Report.

CONTEXT: Governments at all levels work to ensure a healthy public, yet financing, organization, and delivery of public health services differ across the United States. A 2012 Institute of Medicine Finance report provided a series of recommendations to ensure a high-performing and adequately funded public health infrastructure. OBJECTIVES: This review examines the influence of the Finance report's 10 recommendations on public health policy and practice. DESIGN: This review utilized peer-reviewed and gray literature published since 2012. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Documents that address at least one of the Finance report's 10 recommendations and contain information on either official actions taken in response to the Finance report or evidence of the report's influence on the practice community. RESULTS: Of 2394 unique documents found, a total of 56 documents met the eligibility criteria. Review of these 56 documents indicated that the most substantial activity related to the recommendations was focused on the "minimum package of public health services" concept and establishment of a uniform chart of accounts. DISCUSSION: Progress has been mixed on the Finance report recommendations. Improved tracking and auditing of public health activity appears to be advancing, yet financial benchmarks remain unmet. Challenges remain in determining actual investment in public health and equitable resource allocation approaches. State and local health department use of cost estimation methodology and a uniform chart of accounts tool has contributed to an increase in understanding and improvement in public health spending. CONCLUSIONS: The Finance report has served as a strong impetus for advocating for an increased investment in governmental public health. Efforts are bolstered by informed public health practitioners and stakeholders but often stymied by policy makers who must balance complex competing issues and priorities. Although many successes have occurred, further work is needed toward improving investment in the nation's public health.

Funding Public Health: Achievements and Challenges in Public Health Financing Since the Institute of Medicine's 2012 Report.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review changes in public health finance since the 2012 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report "For the Public's Health: Investing in a Healthier Future." DESIGN: Qualitative study involving key informant interviews. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of US public health practitioners, leaders, and academics expected to be knowledgeable about the report recommendations, public health practice, and changes in public health finance since the report. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Qualitative feedback about changes to public health finance since the report. RESULTS: Thirty-two interviews were conducted between April and May 2019. The greatest momentum toward the report recommendations has occurred predominantly at the state and local levels, with recommendations requiring federal action making less progress. In addition, much of the progress identified is consensus building and preparation for change rather than clear changes. Overall, progress toward the recommendations has been slow. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the achievements reported by respondents were characterized as increased dialogue and individual state or local progress rather than widespread, identifiable policy or practice changes. Participants suggested that public health as a field needs to achieve further consensus and a uniform voice in order to advocate for changes at a federal level. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE: Slow progress in achieving 2012 IOM Finance Report recommendations and lack of a cohesive voice pose threats to the public's health, as can be seen in the context of COVID-19 emergency response activities. The pandemic and the nation's inadequate response have highlighted deficiencies in our current system and emphasize the need for coordinated and sustained core public health infrastructure funding at the federal level.

County health outcomes linkage to county spending on social services, building infrastructure, and law and order.

Will counties that reallocate money from law enforcement to social services improve subsequent markers of population wellbeing? In this study, we measure the association between county government spending across multiple sectors and Life Expectancy at Birth (LEB) in the U.S. using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. We constructed a Structural Equation Model to determine whether social expenditure, building infrastructure, and spending on law and order were positively or negatively associated with LEB three-years after initial spending. The analysis compared data between 2002-05 and 2007-10 and was stratified for urban and rural counties. In rural counties, a one-standard-deviation increase in social spending increased subsequent LEB by 0.58 (SE 0.16) and 0.36 (SE 0.16) years in 2005 and 2010, respectively. In urban counties, a one-standard-deviation increase in building infrastructure spending increased subsequent LEB by 1.14 (SE 0.51) and 1.05 (SE 0.49) years in 2005 and 2010, respectively. In 2002, a one-standard-deviation increase in law and order spending significantly decreased subsequent life expectancy, 2.2 (SE 1.27) and 0.46 (SE 0.13) years in urban and rural counties, respectively. Similarly, investments in building infrastructure for urban counties and social services for rural counties were associated with subsequently higher life expectancy three years later after initial investments.

US Public Health Neglected: Flat Or Declining Spending Left States Ill Equipped To Respond To COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted concern about the integrity of the US public health infrastructure. Federal, state, and local governments spend $93 billion annually on public health in the US, but most of this spending is at the state level. Thus, shoring up gaps in public health preparedness and response requires an understanding of state spending. We present state spending trends in eight categories of public health activity from 2008 through 2018. We obtained data from the Census Bureau for all states except California and coded the data by public health category. Although overall national health expenditures grew by 4.3 percent in this period, state governmental public health spending saw no statistically significant growth between 2008 and 2018 except in injury prevention. Moreover, state spending levels on public health were not restored after cuts experienced during the Great Recession, leaving states ill equipped to respond to COVID-19 and other emerging health needs.

Aligning US Spending Priorities Using the Health Impact Pyramid Lens.

Thomas Frieden's "health impact pyramid" presents a hierarchy in which the wide base of the pyramid of socioeconomic factors at a population level has more impact on the health of the public than do individually focused interventions at the pyramid's top.From this pyramid perspective, the US spending priorities are misaligned, as expenses targeted at public health and socioeconomic factors are far outstripped by spending on individual health care services at the top of the pyramid. The nation's ongoing debate on health care reform continues to focus on access to individual health care services, despite evidence demonstrating the health impacts of population-level efforts at the base of the pyramid and the synergistic health impacts of health and social service collaboration.We examine the need for improved systems alignment through the lens of the health impact pyramid. We catalog the types of misalignments and their social, political, and systems genesis. We identify promising opportunities to realign US health spending toward the socioeconomic factor base of the health impact pyramid and emphasize the need to integrate and align public health, social services, and medical care in the United States.

Inaccuracy of Official Estimates of Public Health Spending in the United States, 2000-2018.

Objectives. To examine the accuracy of official estimates of governmental health spending in the United States.Methods. We coded approximately 2.7 million administrative spending records from 2000 to 2018 for public health activities according to a standardized Uniform Chart of Accounts produced by the Public Health Activities and Services Tracking project. The official US Public Health Activity estimate was recalculated using updated estimates from the data coding.Results. Although official estimates place governmental public health spending at more than $93 billion (2.5% of total spending on health), detailed examination of spending records from state governments shows that official estimates include substantial spending on individual health care services (e.g., behavioral health) and that actual spending on population-level public health activities is more likely between $35 billion and $64 billion (approximately 1.5% of total health spending).Conclusions. Clarity in understanding of public health spending is critical for characterizing its value proposition. Official estimates are likely tens of billions of dollars greater than actual spending.Public Health Implications. Precise and clear spending estimates are material for policymakers to accurately understand the effect of their resource allocation decisions.

The State of Rural Public Health: Enduring Needs in a New Decade.

Public health in the rural United States is a complex and underfunded enterprise. While urban-rural disparities have been a focus for researchers and policymakers alike for decades, inequalities continue to grow. Life expectancy at birth is now 1 to 2 years greater between wealthier urban and rural counties, and is as much as 5 years, on average, between wealthy and poor counties.This article explores the growth in these disparities over the past 40 years, with roots in structural, economic, and social spending differentials that have emerged or persisted over the same time period. Importantly, a focus on place-based disparities recognizes that the rural United States is not a monolith, with important geographic and cultural differences present regionally. We also focus on the challenges the rural governmental public health enterprise faces, the so-called "double disparity" of worse health outcomes and behaviors alongside modest investment in health departments compared with their nonrural peers.Finally, we offer 5 population-based "prescriptions" for supporting rural public health in the United States. These relate to greater investment and supporting rural advocacy to better address the needs of the rural United States in this new decade.

Monetary and Nonmonetary Costs and Benefits of a Public Health Master's Degree in the 21st Century.

As postsecondary tuition and debt levels continue to rise, the value proposition of higher education has been increasingly called into question by the popular media and the general public. Recent data from the National Center for Education Statistics now show early career earnings and debt, by program, for thousands of institutions across the United States. This comes at an inflection point for public health education-master's degrees have seen 20 years of growth, but forecasts now call for, at best, stagnation.Forces inside and outside the field of public health are shifting supply and demand for public health master's degrees. We discuss these forces and identify potential monetary and nonmonetary costs and benefits of these degrees.Overall, we found a net benefit in career outcomes associated with a public health master's degree, although it is clear that some other master's degrees likely offer greater lifetime earning potentials or lower lifetime debt associated with degree attainment. We outline the issues academic public health must engage in to successfully attract and train the next generation of public health graduates.