199002 Comparison between Kansas and the Pacific Northwest: Perceived competency of environmental health service providers in delivering the ten essential public health services

Wednesday, November 11, 2009: 8:50 AM

Daniel L. Partridge, RS, MPH , Lawrence-Douglas County Health Department, Lawrence, KS
Ruth Wetta-Hall, RN, PhD, MPH, MSN , Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS
Traci Hart, PhD, MA , Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS
Angelia M. Paschal, PhD, MEd , Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS
Jack A. Brown, MPA, MPH , Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS
Carl Osaki, RS, MSPH , School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
        
Training in the ten essential public health services may serve as a solution to the growing complexity in environmental health (EH) work and the reduction in the numbers of EH service providers. This exploratory, descriptive, convenience sample study was designed to assess and compare the perceptions of agency competency to provide the essential public health services among Kansas' EH service providers to those of the Pacific Northwest (N= 240).

The two groups had similar representation in race, sex, years of experience, agency type, and having an organizational performance measure in place; however, Pacific Northwest respondents were more likely to have supervisory responsibilities and to work within larger organizations. Significant differences between group responses were observed in six of the ten essential environmental public health services including: 1 (Monitor to identify EH problems), 4 (Mobilize partnerships), 5 (Develop policies and plans), 6 (Enforce laws and regulations), 8 (Assure competent EH workforce), and 9 (Evaluate EH services). Kansas respondents answered “yes” at a higher rate for all ten essential service question sets. Findings have implications for workforce development education and training.

Learning Objectives:
List the ten essential public health services. Explain the difference in findings between the two geographical regions. Describe the two implications of the study’s findings for workforce development education and training.

Keywords: Competency, Environmental Health

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: Ruth Wetta-Hall, Assistant Professor in the Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health at the University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, is a registered nurse holding master degrees in nursing administration and public health, and a Ph.D. in Community Psychology. She teaches public health administration, performance improvement and program evaluation in the KUSM-W, MPH program. As the Director of Research and Evaluation Associates in Community and Clinical Health (REACH) Center , Ruth and her research team support the design and implementation of studies that serve clinical and community-based organizations. Ruth has 15 years of clinical experience in emergency and intensive care nursing, and more than five years of experience in quality improvement and Outcomes Research.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

See more of: Workforce Development II
See more of: Health Administration