|
Public Health Readiness: Lessons Learned From Using a Community-Based, Participatory Approach to Evaluate Local Public Health Preparedness Planning in Massachusetts
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Bryan Hall,
Institute for Community Health,
brhall@challiance.org
|
| Justeen Hyde,
Institute for Community Health,
jhyde@challiance.org
|
| Abstract:
Community-based participatory evaluation strives to engage community partners in the development and implementation of studies, from the formulation of questions and methodologies to the interpretation and dissemination of results. In Massachusetts, this approach is being used to evaluate public health-based emergency preparedness planning activities directed by the Cambridge, MA Public Health Department, Advanced Practice Center in a 27-community emergency preparedness region surrounding Boston.
This paper will focus on the strategies developed to utilize a participatory approach in a newly emerging field of practice with shifting expectations and responsibilities. In addition to an overview of the process and outcome measures developed for the evaluation, strategies for engaging and eliciting the input from community partners with limited time and resources will also be discussed. The lessons learned from this unique collaborative venture will provide helpful information for other evaluators interested in evaluation of emergency preparedness planning and other local public health activities.
|
|
Homeland Security: The Federal, State, and Local Conundrum
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Christopher Cihlar,
DFI Government Services,
ccihlar@dfi-intl.com
|
| Sean McLaughlin,
DFI Government Services,
smclaughlin@dfi-intl.com
|
| Abstract:
Federal, state and local homeland security authorities have a shared responsibility in preparing for terrorist attacks and natural disasters. However, these stakeholders often hold different and sometimes conflicting views about what it means to be "prepared.” While the federal government has in place a national strategy and seeks data from local jurisdictions to demonstrate progress in achieving national goals, this data is, at a local level, generally insufficient to demonstrate local preparedness improvements. This paper begins with an analysis of the dichotomy between federal and state and local preparedness efforts. It then presents a series of recommended evaluation strategies that jurisdictions can use to ensure they both fulfill crucial federal data requirements and are able to appropriately meet their own critical need to measure local preparedness improvements.
|
|
Planning for Pandemic Influenza: Evaluation of a National Public Engagement Process
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Denise Bulling,
University of Nebraska,
dbulling@nebraska.edu
|
| Mark DeKraai,
University of Nebraska,
mdekraai@nebraska.edu
|
| Abstract:
A series of facilitated public forums were held across the United States to get the public's input regarding vaccination prioritization in the event of a pandemic. A mixed methods evaluation framework was employed to assess the impact of forums with participants. Additionally, the evaluation included a component to assess the impact the entire series had on the ultimate decisions of policy makers regarding vaccination priorities for the United States. This presentation highlights the results of the evaluation and the benefits of evaluation to disaster planners.
|
|
Responder Alert Prophylaxis Initiative Drill (Operation RAPID): Developing a Comprehensive Evaluation Strategy for a Multi-site Evaluation
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Elizabeth Ablah,
University of Kansas School of Medicine,
eablah@kumc.edu
|
| Kurt Konda,
University of Kansas School of Medicine,
kkonda@kumc.edu
|
| Eileen Scanlon,
Nassau County Department of Health,
eileen.scanlon@hhsnassaucountyny.us
|
| Leslie Horn,
Columbia University,
lah2110@columbia.edu
|
| Kristine Gebbie,
Columbia University,
kmg24@columbia.edu
|
| Abstract:
Operation RAPID, an exercise simulating the airborne release of anthrax requiring the mass prophylaxis of first responders throughout Nassau County (Long Island), necessitated a multi-faceted exercise evaluation utilizing a pool of 100 volunteer evaluators to observe 25 separate sites, differentiated by geography and function, including variable POD types, central distribution, and emergency operations. The exercise’s five competency-based objectives were utilized in the development of standardized tools, including checklists of observable actions and participant and staff surveys based on the job action sheets for the exercise. Though the tools necessarily differed based on the specific tasks performed by each functional area of the exercise, a uniform evaluation was made possible by focusing on the tasks of each functional area as related to the overall exercise objectives and by providing a uniform training in the week leading up to the exercise for all evaluators, regardless of the exercise portion for which they were responsible. Operation RAPID was the first test of new mass dispensing plans, so evaluation was critical to analyzing the effectiveness of these plans that may be relied upon to protect the population of the county in a public health emergency.
|
| | | |