The Cost of Providing the Foundational Public Health Services in Ohio

Northern Nevada Public Health: Utilizing the Public Health Workforce Calculator and Workforce Capacity Self-assessment Tools to Develop a Framework for Workforce Investment

CONTEXT

Health departments nationally are critically understaffed and lack infrastructure support. By examining current staffing and allocations through a Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS) lens at the Northern Nevada Public Health (NNPH), there is an opportunity to make a strong case for greater investment if current dedicated full-time equivalents are inadequate and to guide which investments in public health workforce are prioritized.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of the Public Health Workforce Calculator (calculator) and other tools to identify and prioritize FPHS workforce needs in a field application.

DESIGN

Field application of the calculator in conjunction with the use of FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment tools.

SETTING

NNPH.

PARTICIPANTS

NNPH and Public Health Foundation (PHF).

INTERVENTION

From June 2022 through April 2023, PHF collaborated with NNPH, serving Washoe County, to provide expertise and assistance as NNPH undertook an assessment of its workforce needs based upon the FPHS model.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparison of the calculator output with FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment tools.

RESULTS

The calculator and the FPHS capacity self-assessment process yielded complementary FPHS workforce capacity gap data. The use of a structured and transparent process, coupled with additional tools that included prioritizing needs, provided a viable and sustainable process for public health workforce investment planning. NNPH successfully utilized the results to bolster a supplemental funding request and a state public health appropriation.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the calculator and an FPHS workforce capacity self-assessment in a facilitated and structured process such as that used by NNPH to identify staffing priorities may hold promise as an approach that could be used to support decision-making and justification for infrastructure resources when funding for public health increases in the future.

Estimating the Cost of the COVID-19 Response for Local Health Departments: Evidence From Ohio

This study assessed the staffing allocations and associated costs incurred by Ohio local health departments (LHDs) in response to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were extracted from the annual financial reports of Ohio LHDs for 2020 and 2021, encompassing a sample of 38 LHDs in 2020 and 60 LHDs in 2021. Descriptive analysis showed that Ohio LHDs committed substantial resources to responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although there was considerable variability across LHDs, median staffing and compensation collectively constituted 22% of total staffing and compensation. Multivariate regression analysis found minimal associations between the examined agency and community-level variables and the differences in staffing allocations and associated costs incurred by LHDs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. After decades of underfunding and understaffing, securing sustainable funding will be crucial to equip LHDs across the country with the necessary resources to deliver comprehensive public health services in their communities.

Staffing Up and Sustaining the Public Health Workforce

OBJECTIVES

Estimate the number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) needed to fully implement Foundational Public Health Services (FPHS) at the state and local levels in the United States.

METHODS

Current and full implementation cost estimation data from 168 local health departments (LHDs), as well as data from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials and the National Association of County and City Health Officials, were utilized to estimate current and "full implementation" staffing modes to estimate the workforce gap.

RESULTS

The US state and local governmental public health workforce needs at least 80 000 additional FTEs to deliver core FPHS in a post-COVID-19 landscape. LHDs require approximately 54 000 more FTEs, and states health agency central offices require approximately 26 000 more.

CONCLUSIONS

Governmental public health needs tens of thousands of more FTEs, on top of replacements for those leaving or retiring, to fully implement core FPHS.

IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE

Transitioning a COVID-related surge in staffing to a permanent workforce requires substantial and sustained investment from federal and state governments to deliver even the bare minimum of public health services.

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.