Competencies, Training Needs, and Turnover Among Rural Compared With Urban Local Public Health Practitioners: 2021 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey.

Objectives. To compare rural versus urban local public health workforce competencies and training needs, COVID-19 impact, and turnover risk. Methods. Using the 2021 Public Health Workforce Interest and Needs Survey, we examined the association between local public health agency rural versus urban location in the United States (n = 29 751) and individual local public health staff reports of skill proficiencies, training needs, turnover risk, experiences of bullying due to work as a public health professional, and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms attributable to COVID-19. Results. Rural staff had higher odds than urban staff of reporting proficiencies in community engagement, cross-sectoral partnerships, and systems and strategic thinking as well as training needs in data-based decision-making and in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Rural staff were also more likely than urban staff to report leaving because of stress, experiences of bullying, and avoiding situations that made them think about COVID-19. Conclusions. Our findings demonstrate that rural staff have unique competencies and training needs but also experience significant stress. Public Health Implications. Our findings provide the opportunity to accurately target rural workforce development trainings and illustrate the need to address reported stress and experiences of bullying. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(6):689-699. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307273).

A Uniform Chart of Accounts: Strengthening Public Health Practice and Research Through Standardized Financial Data.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic made the long-standing need for a national uniform financial reporting standard for governmental public health agencies clear, as little information was available to quantify state and local public health agencies' financial needs during the pandemic response. Such a uniform system would also inform resource allocation to underresourced communities and for specific services, while filling other gaps in practice, research, and policy making. This article describes lessons learned and recommendations for ensuring broad adoption of a national Uniform Chart of Accounts (UCOA) for public health departments. PROGRAM: Leveraging previous efforts, the UCOA for public health systems was developed through collaboration with public health leaders. The UCOA allows state and local public health agencies to report spending on activities and funding sources, along with practice-defined program areas and capabilities. IMPLEMENTATION: To date, 78 jurisdictions have utilized the UCOA to crosswalk financial information at the program level, enabling comparisons with peers. EVALUATION: Jurisdictions participating in the UCOA report perceptions of substantial up-front time investment to crosswalk their charts of accounts to the UCOA standard but derive a sense of valuable potential for benchmarking against peers, ability to engage in resource allocation, use of data for accountability, and general net positive value of engagement with the UCOA. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE: The UCOA is considered a need among practice partners. Implementing the UCOA at scale will require government involvement, a reporting requirement and/or incentives, technical assistance, financial support for agencies to participate, and a means of visualizing the data.

Rural Public Health Data Challenges During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case for Building Better Systems Ahead of a Public Health Crisis.

CONTEXT: Rural public health personnel serve communities that have been particularly susceptible to COVID-19 and yet faced the pandemic with far less well-resourced capacity than their urban counterparts. A critical aspect of addressing local health inequities is access to high-quality population data and the capacity to effectively use data to support decision making. However, much of the data required to investigate inequities are not readily available to rural local health departments and the tools and training to analyze data are often lacking. PROGRAM: The purpose of our effort was to explore rural data challenges related to COVID-19 and provide recommendations for improving rural data access and capacity ahead of future crises. IMPLEMENTATION: We gathered qualitative data in 2 phases, more than 8 months apart, from rural public health practice personnel. Initial data were gathered in October-November 2020 regarding rural public health data needs during the COVID-19 pandemic and then to later identify whether the same findings held true in July 2021 or whether access to and capacity to use data to address the pandemic and related inequities improved as the pandemic progressed. EVALUATION: In our 4-state exploration focused on access and use of data among rural public health systems to promote health equity in the Northwest United States, we found tremendous and ongoing unmet data needs, challenges with communicating data, and a lack of capacity to meet this public health crisis. DISCUSSION: Recommendations for addressing these challenges include increasing dedicated resources specifically to rural public health systems, improving data access and infrastructure, and providing dedicated data-related workforce development.

COVID-19 Revealed Shortcomings Of The US Public Health System And The Need To Strengthen Funding And Accountability.

The US governmental public health system, which includes federal, state, and local agencies, is seen by many observers as having a money problem, stemming from a lack of resources. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this lack of resources has had unfortunate consequences for the communities that public health practice leaders are expected to protect. Yet the money problem is complex and involves understanding the nature of chronic public health underinvestment, identifying what money is spent in public health and what the country gets for it, and determining how much money is needed to do the work of public health in the future. This Commentary elucidates each of these issues and provides recommendations for making public health services more financially sustainable and accountable. Well-functioning public health systems require adequate funding, but a modernized public health financial data system is also key to the systems' success. There is a great need for standardization and accountability in public health finance, along with incentives and the generation of research evidence demonstrating the value of and most effective delivery for a baseline of public health services that every community should expect.

Learning to Lead: 3 Models to Support Public Health Leadership Development.

CONTEXT: The current public health system is underresourced and understaffed, which has been exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic. In addition, there has been a decline in the public health workforce at both state and local levels during the last decade. While workforce numbers dwindle, public health systems have to address increasingly complex challenges-such as climate change, chronic diseases, and health equity-challenges that require skilled, adaptive leaders. This article describes the importance of leadership development and how 3 public health training centers (PHTCs) are building leadership skills in the public health workforce. PROGRAM: To address the need for public health leadership training, the PHTCs in the Health & Human Services (HHS) Regions 4, 7, and 10 all offer public health leadership institutes (PHLIs). IMPLEMENTATION: The 3 PHLIs discussed in this article vary in longevity (3-18 years), cohort length (8-12 months), and format (virtual, in-person, and hybrid); yet, all 3 emphasize adaptive leadership through a health equity lens and intentional opportunities to apply skills in practice. EVALUATION: Each PHLI conducts extensive evaluation based on Kirkpatrick's levels of evaluation and collects common metrics collected by all PHTCs. Data from the PHLIs illustrate high levels of satisfaction with learning, presentation of data, identification of workplace actions, and improvement of subject matter understanding. Each PHLI also has numerous stories of impact. DISCUSSION: With public health leaders leaving the workforce and the complexities of practice increasing, leadership training is critical to the current workforce and succession planning. These PHTCs provide a significant, enduring resource toward the development of our nation's public health leaders, as well as meeting the unique needs of their regions' workforces.

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.

A critical gap: Advanced practice nurses focused on the public's health.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for nurse leaders who "embrace the interconnection" between medicine and public health. The inequitable impact of COVID-19 on people of color demonstrates the importance of applying expertise from nursing practice and public health systems to work with communities and other professions on complex health issues. Yet, despite a clear need for improved population health, educational programs designed to produce Advanced Public Health Nurses, with skills to address complex system changes, have become increasingly scarce. PURPOSE: We put forward the perspective that the nation needs more advanced practice nurses prepared for leadership roles focused on the health of whole populations, marginalized communities, and the systems and policies that promote their health. DISCUSSION: We argue that opportunities should be expanded for nurses to attain education for these roles through increased investments in the Doctor of Nursing Practice model to prepare nurses for advanced public health specialty practice.