Pillars of Governmental Environmental Public Health | A Guide to Scalable Environmental Public Health Programs
ship. Given its seasonal nature, it was suggested that the student workforce might be better used for special proj- ects or disease investigation rather than routine duties. Participants suggest having dedicated staff for each of the various EPH programs to ensure programs are operating as necessary. They shared an example where during a large outbreak of a vectorborne disease, the media reported that because EPH staff were pulled from conducting restaurant inspections to outbreak response, many of the restaurants were not being inspected. To avoid a drastic shift in func- tionality, they advocate for at least one dedicated staff person per EPH program area to maintain consistency. Unfortunately, in jurisdictions where there are no dedi- cated mosquito control districts or dedicated programs, EPH professionals are likely doing mosquito control work as an add-on duty to their regular roles, which can lead to under-training and potentially less effective prevention efforts. Contrarily, specialization might make it difficult to move staff between programs to support seasonal needs. Access to an entomologist and veterinarian could prove helpful to jurisdictions. Sometimes these relationships exist through partnerships with state health departments. Additionally, partnerships with laboratories for testing are also essential to confirm disease presence. Overall, staffing for this program is generally driven by the number of diseases and vectors relevant to the geographic area of the department, economic needs and funding avail- ability, and population served. From the key informant interviews, we estimate about 0.45 FTEs per 100,000 pop- ulation served for a jurisdiction where tourism is not a big factor. In an area with higher tourism, we estimate a need of approximately 1.35 FTEs per 100,000 population served.
The REHS/RS credential was recommended for this pro- gram area, particularly for supervisory positions, though specialized vector control certifications and training were often prioritized. For some jurisdictions, a vector control technician certification license could be required by the state. Because vectors are geographically significant, EPH professionals might seek training specific to their state. Integrated pest and vector management training was identified as valuable for professionals in this program area. Due to the potentially hazardous chemicals and risks involved, such as pesticide spraying and vector trapping and flagging, participants recommend that EPH profes - sionals performing the duties of a vectorborne program be properly and specially trained for each activity.
Equipment Needs
Field work often requires specialized equipment, including protective gear (e.g., insect repellent, Tyvek suits), collec- tion tools (e.g., flea drags, tick cloths, traps, lures, aspira - tors, vials, insect cages), inspection tools (e.g., plumbing snakes for rodent burrow examination), and control prod- ucts (e.g., adulticides and larvicides). Common unspecialized equipment includes flashlights, UV lights for detecting urine, and probes for testing holes (since openings larger than 1/4 in. can allow small mice to enter or exit). Additional basic tools include cameras or phones for documentation, computers or tablets for recording information, and personal protective equipment (PPE) such as eye protection and gloves. Jurisdictions with laboratory facilities might require special- ized equipment, including dedicated refrigerators and freez- ers for sample storage, coolers and ice packs for shipping specimens to labs, microscopes for examination, forceps for handling specimens, pinning equipment for mounting, and larval or sorting trays for organizing samples.
Education/Training/Certifications
For supervisory positions, participants recommend a bach- elor’s degree in the science field.
30
Powered by FlippingBook