First published on October 20, 2009
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, doi:10.1001/DMP.0b013e3181ba1504
© 2009 American Medical Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Publish Ahead of Print[PDF])
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Montgomery, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Boulton, M. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Montgomery, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Boulton, M. L.

RESEARCH

From Survey to Assessment: Characterizing Michigan's Public Health Workforce

JoLynn P. Montgomery 1*, Angela J. Beck 1, Erin E. Rothney 1, Matthew L. Boulton 1

1 Dr Montgomery is a research investigator in the Department of Epidemiology and Director, Michigan Center for Public Health Preparedness. Ms Beck is Program Manager and Ms Rothney is Public Health Liaison, Office of Public Health Practice, School of Public Health, and Dr Boulton is Associate Dean for Practice, School of Public Health, University of Michigan.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jpmont{at}umich.edu.


arrow
Abstract

Background: To plan for continuity of operations, it is important to know which types of position vacancies within health departments are likely to occur and the kind of training needed to ensure protection of the public's health.

Methods: To describe anticipated gaps in the public health workforce and to identify specific areas of training needed to ensure a highly skilled workforce, the authors surveyed Michigan state employees with public health responsibilities in spring 2007.

Results: More than half (54%) of surveyed public health professionals reported they plan to leave the workforce within 10 years. Preparedness-specific topics were generally viewed as less important than more general public health topics. Some preparedness-funded tools have become integrated into daily operations, whereas others were viewed as more important in an everyday, rather than emergency preparedness, context.

Conclusions: Framing preparedness activities beyond the scope of preparedness to directly relate them to daily public health operations would encourage public health professionals to perceive them as more important. For public health preparedness to be fully realized, it must be considered a central component of public health operations, allowing for seamless integration during emergencies small and large.

Key Words: education, public health professional, health manpower, emergency preparedness