Pillars of Governmental Environmental Public Health | A Guide to Scalable Environmental Public Health Programs
Characteristics of a Successful Emergency Preparedness Program
Meaningful Outcome Measures
PURPOSE
METRIC
Program effectiveness
• Percentage of staff who complete at least one emergency preparedness training per quarter annually • Percentage of emergency response plans and protocols reviewed and updated per year * • Percentage of continuity of operations plans reviewed or updated annually * • Percentage of staff with required ICS certifications (100, 200, 700, 800) per year * • Percentage of emergency
Because EPH professionals are not necessarily perform- ing emergency preparedness activities as daily duties, building and maintaining relationships with emergency preparedness professionals and agencies in their state is essential to a successful emergency response. As one participant stated, “You don’t want to exchange business cards at the disaster.”
responses followed by completed after-action
reviews with documented lessons learned per year * Response capability • Average time from emergency
You don’t want to exchange business cards at the disaster.
notification to full operational response (in hours) per year *
* EPH professionals who participated in focus groups, key informant interviews, and/or the national field survey consistently identified this metric as moderately to extremely useful. The ability to provide a capable and competent work- force in the field when needed is a meaningful measure of EPH capacity in emergency preparedness and response. Training for the EPH workforce to serve as responders to health-related emergencies is an important metric of response capacity. After-action reviews that recommend actionable steps to improve planning and response to future emergencies provide a meaningful perspective on the effectiveness of those trainings. Staffing EPH capacity in emergency response is generally based on a comprehensive threat assessment and vulnerability analysis to determine potential needs. Some emergencies or natural disasters, such as tsunamis, earthquakes, wild- fires, hurricanes, and flooding affect some jurisdictions and not others. Participants shared that EPH professionals in their juris- dictions are trained in emergency response so that they could be deployed in an emergency capacity. Though not
Successful programs would have updated policies and procedures, such as a continuity of operations plan (COOP) that supports the EPH workforce’s ability to respond. As an emergency preparedness capacity workforce, it is important that EPH departments clearly outline the roles, responsibilities, and competencies of their EPH profession- als related to emergency response. This outline fosters a shared understanding of the skills and training that EPH professionals possess and expedites mutual aid requests between agencies. While not specifically discussed in this research, juris - dictions might find our Environmental Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPHEPR) capa- bility framework helpful. EPHEPR provides guidance for assessing and strengthening readiness to address core public health issues in disasters. The framework includes 15 functional areas with corresponding tasks that explain each function necessary to protect against environmental health threats. Additionally, our guidance on EPH strike teams is available to support the development of scalable units that can deliver targeted assistance during emergen- cies. More information on these resources can be found at https://www.neha.org/epr-framework and https://www. neha.org/PDFs/Strike_Team_White_Paper_FINAL.pdf
32
Powered by FlippingBook