Displaying 17 results for

Over the years evidence has expanded on community health workers (CHWs) improving outcomes and even reducing disparities in heart disease and many other public health priority areas. However, their presence in state and local public health workforce is still modest. A number of efforts have sought to expand the role of CHWs in medical care settings by developing reimbursement through third party payers, along with including them in managed care contracts and incorporating them in state Medicaid plans. The experience and lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic could substantially change the way we practice public health in the future, and provides opportunities to expand the role and presence of CHWs in the state and local public health workforce.

In-depth analysis on state health policy surrounding the public health workforce. This is part of ASTHO's annual legislative prospectus series.

Alabama shares six ways a cross-cutting approach successfully impacted its PHIG workplan implementation.

Sandra Powell, deputy director of Rhode Island Department of Health, how her department was able to increase the number of permanent positions to meet critical public health needs.

DELPH scholars discuss the important role of Community Health Workers (CHWs) in the public health workforce, the need for support, recognition, and investment in their development, and the importance of sustainable funding for CHW programs across the United States.

After decades of underinvestment, health departments received increased funding for disease intervention services, strengthening the existing workforce, and providing opportunities to expand workforce capacity.

Investing in Indiana’s Public Health Infrastructure Through Community-Driven Policy Change public health infrastructure, community driven policy, indiana state health commissioner, public health system, indiana department of health, outpatient facilities, technical assistance, data and information integration, emergency preparedness, child and adolescent health, legislative action, state and local elected officials, health problems, health care, health system, health departments, federal agencies, essential public health services, centers for disease control, state and local levels, health outcomes, health organization, covid-19 pandemic, health infrastructure, promoting health, public health organizations, states public health, federal funding, astho, association of state and territorial health officials Maggie Davis, Keith Coleman Indiana enacts historic public health funding through community engagement and legislative support. In April 2023, Indiana passed bill SB 4, which was a historic investment in the state's public health funding and restructuring its public health system. This case study shares how the Governor's Public Health Commission and the Indiana Department of Health approached community listening sessions, formulated recommendations, and successfully built legislative support to reform the public health system in the state. Get the Report (PDF) website yes

Public health agencies have an opportunity to recruit for and retain a diverse and skilled workforce. As new funding opportunities emerge ASTHO recommends a focus on proof, people, and processes.

In addition to the countless hours worked during the COVID-19 pandemic, many public health workers are also grappling with how to repay outstanding federal loans. In response, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) recently announced temporary relief to current and future Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program participants as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Though now an illegal practice, government contracts, policies, and practices have generally excluded women, and Black, Indigenous, and people of color. Still, practices and existing structures continue the inequitable distribution of all contracts. Governmental and non-governmental grants and funding should benefit the communities they serve while being proportionate to the communities' demographics. This is where inclusive contracting comes in.

Fortunately, looking at the ASTHO Directors of Public Health Preparedness (DPHP) peer group and seeing the great work of public health emergency preparedness and response programs across the nation, we recognize that there is much to be celebrated this month—but also much more work that needs to be done.

Public Health Organizations Unite in Call to Restore State and Local Emergency Funding and Approve Emergency Supplemental for Zika ARLINGTON, VA—As the weather warms and the threat of Zika virus intensifies, state and local health agencies are faced with the dilemma of a significant funding cut, as documented in two new reports released by the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL), and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). Absent dedicated funding from Congress to prepare and respond to the threat of Zika virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last month announced it will need to reprogram $44.25 million from the Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) fund to help combat Zika. State and local health agencies depend on PHEP funding to prepare and respond to health emergencies, everything from natural disasters to terrorist or mass casualty events. Preparing for and responding to emerging infectious disease is also a primary use of PHEP funding, meaning state and local health agencies will have less capability to find, control, and mitigate localized outbreaks of Zika as a result of the reallocation. ASTHO, in cooperation with CSTE, APHL, and NACCHO, asked their members what the consequences of the PHEP reprogramming would be, should the cuts take effect on July 1. The results raise significant concern showing that state and local emergency response will be compromised. Major findings from the surveys include the following. Community Preparedness Will Suffer the Most Both state (77%) and local (75%) respondents listed “Community Preparedness” as the area that will be most negatively affected. Scenario planning and training exercises will be curtailed or eliminated. Volunteer recruitment and training will slow or cease. Community partnerships and contracts with specialized vendors will be compromised. Laboratory Testing and Surveillance Capacity Will Diminish More than 70 percent (72%) of state respondents said they expect that functional preparedness programs, including disease surveillance, epidemiology, lab services, and mosquito control, would be negatively affected. Labs would be forced to delay or eliminate new equipment purchases or scheduled equipment maintenance. Public Health Staff Cuts State and local agencies suffered significant job losses—up to 20 percent—during and after the Great Recession that started in late 2007, and they have not come close to adding that number back since. Both state and local survey respondents report likely staffing cuts as a result of the PHEP reprogramming. Almost two-thirds (64%) of local health agencies responding to the survey said they expect to lose at least one health preparedness staff person. There is significant fear that this could worsen significantly if the reprogramming continues in future years as the threat of Zika is not expected to abate in the short term. Zika Response at State and Local Level Will Be Compromised as a Result of the Reallocation State and local health agency leaders are unified in saying the reduction of PHEP funding will harm their ability to respond to and control Zika once it establishes itself in the U.S. Our capacity to identify localized outbreaks and our capability to control and eliminate virus transmission will be slower. Local agency responders cited the following concerns: A decrease in staffing, Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) unit, or volunteer sustainability. A reduction in opportunities to provide staff trainings as well as plan and conduct exercises. An inability to conduct surveillance or epidemiologic investigations. At the state level, 61 percent of respondents say decreased PHEP funding in their state will significantly harm their ability to prepare for and respond to Zika. One respondent wrote: “The PHEP funding in [our state] is the resource we have for providing a response to Zika, and any other novel communicable disease. By reducing this funding you are reducing our ability to respond to a Zika event in [our state].” All public health sectors—federal, state, and local—have worked hard to build and sustain an all-hazards preparedness infrastructure that can deliver on their mission to protect and enhance the health and well-being of their constituents. However, large-scale emergencies, such as the 2009 influenza pandemic, Ebola, and Zika, require sufficient and reliable core funding to maintain a solid and ready public health infrastructure and additional emergency funds to provide the enhanced protections and services those living in the United States deserve and expect. Robbing the fund that sustains the all-hazards infrastructure to pay for large, widespread emergencies, no matter how necessary, ensures that infrastructure will deteriorate. Dedicated emergency funding that will enable all public health sectors to prepare for and respond to Zika is essential. ASTHO Press Release Boilerplate NACCHO Boilerplate APHL Boilerplate CSTE Boilerplate website yes

Government Shutdown Puts Nation’s Health at Risk Government Shutdown in 2018 Puts Nation’s Health at Risk ARLINGTON, VA—Michael Fraser, executive director of ASTHO, issued the following statement on the federal government shutdown: “We are deeply disappointed that Congress and the Administration have failed to fund the federal government. This inaction means that 50 percent of HHS staff will be furloughed, which in turn will compromise public health professionals’ ability to rapidly respond to outbreaks, detect diseases, and provide the necessary support to state and territorial health departments. Health promotion and disease prevention activities require support from a robust federal, state, and local workforce and sustained funding. The longer the federal government is shut down, the more harmful the consequences. We strongly urge Congress and the Administration to develop a long-term budget solution so we can continue our mission with certainty and in partnership with our federal partners to improve the health and wellbeing for all.” ASTHO Press Release Boilerplate website yes

In May 2021, President Biden released full details of the fiscal year 2022 budget. Overall, the budget request combines President Biden's American Jobs Plan, his American Families Plan, and funding priorities for the Pentagon and domestic agencies, for a projected total of $6 trillion. Read more about what the president is proposing in this post.

One of President Biden’s first actions just before being sworn into office was to draft up the American Rescue Plan, a sweeping proposal that ASTHO has committed to working with the Biden Administration on. The proposal offers a national vaccination plan, a promise to address COVID-19 health disparities, and efforts to prioritize the expansion the public health workforce. This post details some of the high-level takeaways, as they relate to public health.

One of tools presidents have to implement and drive their strategy are executive actions. Executive orders and presidential memoranda carry the force of law and allow presidents to move quickly, deliver a clear message, organize the functioning of the executive branch, and spotlight critical issues with declarations of commemorative observances.

As the response to COVID-19 transitions from response to recovery, advocacy efforts continue to intensify on Capitol Hill, to help shape negotiations on the fifth emergency supplemental package.