Rural Local Health Departments Research Articles

Rural Public Health Data Challenges During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case for Building Better Systems Ahead of a Public Health Crisis.

Rural public health personnel serve communities that have been particularly susceptible to COVID-19 and yet faced the pandemic with far less well-resourced capacity than their urban counterparts. A critical aspect of addressing local health inequities is access to high-quality population data and the capacity to effectively use data to support decision making. However, much of the data required to investigate inequities are not readily available to rural local health departments and the tools and training to analyze data are often lacking. The purpose of our effort was to explore rural data challenges related to COVID-19 and provide recommendations for improving rural data access and capacity ahead of future crises. We gathered qualitative data in 2 phases, more than 8 months apart, from rural public health practice personnel. Initial data were gathered in October-November 2020 regarding rural public health data needs during the COVID-19 pandemic and then to later identify whether the same findings held true in July 2021 or whether access to and capacity to use data to address the pandemic and related inequities improved as the pandemic progressed. In our 4-state exploration focused on access and use of data among rural public health systems to promote health equity in the Northwest United States, we found tremendous and ongoing unmet data needs, challenges with communicating data, and a lack of capacity to meet this public health crisis. Recommendations for addressing these challenges include increasing dedicated resources specifically to rural public health systems, improving data access and infrastructure, and providing dedicated data-related workforce development.

Addressing Capacity Constraints of Rural Local Health Departments to Support Climate Change Adaptation: Action Is Needed Now.

Looming climate change health impacts among rural communities will require a robust health system response. To reduce health inequities and promote climate justice, rural local health departments (LHDs) must be adequately resourced and supported to engage in climate change mitigation and adaptation policy and program development and implementation. In the United States, small local tax bases, overreliance on revenue from fee-based services, and limited federal funding to support climate change and health programming, have left rural LHDs with limited and inflexible human, financial, and political capital to support engagement in local climate change activities. Because of the urgent demands stemming from climate change, additional investments and supports are needed to rapidly build the capacity and capability of rural LHDs. Federal and state approaches to public health funding should consider the unique climate change and health risks of rural communities. Further, cross-jurisdictional shared service arrangements and state-level support to build rural LHDs’ technical capacity, and research on local impacts and culturally appropriate solutions, must be prioritized.

Progress of Local Health Department Planning Actions for Climate Change: Perspectives from California, USA.

Public health departments are on the frontlines of protecting vulnerable groups and working to eliminate health disparities through prevention interventions, disease surveillance and community education. Exploration of the roles national, state and local health departments (LHDs) play in advancing climate change planning and actions to protect public health is a developing arena of research. This paper presents insights from local public health departments in California, USA on how they addressed the barriers to climate adaptation planning with support from the California Department of Public Health’s Office of Health Equity Climate Change and Health Equity Section (OHE), which administers the California Building Resilience Against Climate Effects Project (CalBRACE). With support from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Climate-Ready States and Cities Initiative (CRSCI), CalBRACE initiated an adaptation project to seed climate planning and actions in county health departments. In this study, we compared the barriers and strategies of twenty-two urban and rural LHDs and explored potential options for climate change adaptation in the public health framework. Using key informant interviews and document reviews, the results showed how engagement with CalBRACE’s Local Health Department Partnership on Climate Change influenced the county departments’ ability to overcome barriers to adaptation through the diversification of funding sources, the leveraging strategic collaborations, extensive public education and communication campaigns, and the development of political capital and champions. The lessons learned and recommendations from this research may provide pathways and practices for national, state and local level health departments to collaborate in developing protocols and integrating systems to respond to health-related climate change impacts, adaptation and implementation.

A Qualitative Analysis of Local Health Departments' Experiences With Contact-Tracing Tools in Response to COVID-19.

A Qualitative Analysis of Local Health Departments' Experiences With Contact-Tracing Tools in Response to COVID-19.

High-Performing Local Health Departments Relate Their Experiences at Community Engagement in Emergency Preparedness.

Local health departments (LHDs) are implementing a national mandate to engage community partners, including individuals, businesses, and community- and faith-based organizations in the larger public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) enterprise. Investigate how LHDs of varying size and resource levels successfully engage the community in PHEP to help uncover "best practices" that aspiring agencies can replicate, particularly in low-resource environments. In-depth, semistructured qualitative interviews with practitioners from 9 highly performing LHDs. Participating agencies comprised equal amounts of small (serving <50 000 residents), medium (serving 50 000-500 000 residents), and large (serving >500 000 residents) LHDs and were diverse in terms of geographic region, rural-urban environment, and governance structure. A cross section of LHD staff (n = 34) including agency leaders, preparedness coordinators, public information officers, and health educators/promoters. Local health department performance at community engagement as determined by top scores in 2 national LHD surveys (2012, 2015) regarding community engagement in PHEP. Based on key informant accounts, high-performing LHDs show a holistic, organization-wide commitment to, rather than discrete focus on, community engagement. Best practices clustered around 5 domains: administration (eg, top executive who models collaborative behavior), organizational culture (eg, solicitous rather than prescriptive posture regarding community needs), social capital (eg, mining preexisting community connections held by other LHD programs), workforce skills (eg, cultural competence), and methods/tactics (eg, visibility in community events unrelated to PHEP). For LHDs that wish to enhance their performance at community engagement in PHEP, change will entail adoption of evidence-based interventions (the technical "what") as well as evidence-based administrative approaches (the managerial "how"). Smaller, rural LHDs should be encouraged that, in the case of PHEP community engagement, they have unique social assets that may help offset advantages that larger, more materially resourced metropolitan health departments may have.

Public Health Agency Accreditation Among Rural Local Health Departments: Influencers and Barriers.

Health department accreditation is a crucial strategy for strengthening public health infrastructure. The purpose of this study was to investigate local health department (LHD) characteristics that are associated with accreditation-seeking behavior. This study sought to ascertain the effects of rurality on the likelihood of seeking accreditation through the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB). Cross-sectional study using secondary data from the 2013 National Association of County & City Health Officials (NACCHO) National Profile of Local Health Departments Study (Profile Study). United States. LHDs (n = 490) that responded to the 2013 NACCHO Profile Survey. LHDs decision to seek PHAB accreditation. Significantly more accreditation-seeking LHDs were located in urban areas (87.0%) than in micropolition (8.9%) or rural areas (4.1%) (P < .001). LHDs residing in urban communities were 16.6 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3-52.3) and micropolitan LHDs were 3.4 times (95% CI, 1.1-11.3) more likely to seek PHAB accreditation than rural LHDs (RLHDs). LHDs that had completed an agency-wide strategic plan were 8.5 times (95% CI, 4.0-17.9), LHDs with a local board of health were 3.3 times (95% CI, 1.5-7.0), and LHDs governed by their state health department were 12.9 times (95% CI, 3.3-50.0) more likely to seek accreditation. The most commonly cited barrier was time and effort required for accreditation application exceeded benefits (73.5%). The strongest predictor for seeking PHAB accreditation was serving an urban jurisdiction. Micropolitan LHDs were more likely to seek accreditation than smaller RLHDs, which are typically understaffed and underfunded. Major barriers identified by the RLHDs included fees being too high and the time and effort needed for accreditation exceeded their perceived benefits. RLHDs will need additional financial and technical support to achieve accreditation. Even with additional funds, clear messaging of the benefits of accreditation tailored to RLHDs will be needed.

The double disparity facing rural local health departments: A short report

The double disparity facing rural local health departments: A short report

Barriers and Incentives to Rural Health Department Accreditation.

Accreditation of local health departments has been identified as a crucial strategy for strengthening the public health infrastructure. Rural local health departments (RLHDs) face many challenges including lower levels of staffing and funding than local health departments serving metropolitan or urban areas; simultaneously their populations experience health disparities related to risky health behaviors, health outcomes, and access to medical care. Through accreditation, rural local health departments can become better equipped to meet the needs of their communities. To better understand the needs of communities by assessing barriers and incentives to state-level accreditation in Missouri from the RLHD perspective. Qualitative analysis of semistructured key informant interviews with Missouri local health departments serving rural communities. Eleven administrators of RLHDs, 7 from accredited and 4 from unaccredited departments, were interviewed. Population size served ranged from 6400 to 52,000 for accredited RLHDs and from 7200 to 73,000 for unaccredited RLHDs. Unaccredited RLHDs identified more barriers to accreditation than accredited RLHDs. Time was a major barrier to seeking accreditation. Unaccredited RLHDs overall did not see accreditation as a priority for their agency and failed to the see value of accreditation. Accredited RLHDs listed more incentives than their unaccredited counterparts. Unaccredited RLHDs identified accountability, becoming more effective and efficient, staff development, and eventual funding as incentives to accreditation. There is a need for better documentation of measurable benefits in order for an RLHD to pursue voluntary accreditation. Those who pursue accreditation are likely to see benefits after the fact, but those who do not pursue do not see the immediate and direct benefits of voluntary accreditation. The finding from this study of state-level accreditation in Missouri provides insight that can be translated to national accreditation.

The Double Disparity Facing Rural Local Health Departments.

Residents of rural jurisdictions face significant health challenges, including some of the highest rates of risky health behaviors and worst health outcomes of any group in the country. Rural communities are served by smaller local health departments (LHDs) that are more understaffed and underfunded than their suburban and urban peers. As a result of history and current need, rural LHDs are more likely than their urban peers to be providers of direct health services, leading to relatively lower levels of population-focused activities. This review examines the double disparity faced by rural LHDs and their constituents: pervasively poorer health behaviors and outcomes and a historical lack of investment by local, state, and federal public health entities.

The Health Educator’s Role in Rural Community Transformation Work: A Multiple Case Study

The Health Educator’s Role in Rural Community Transformation Work: A Multiple Case Study Jacqueline Lanier, Dr. PH, MCHES Abstract Rural communities in the United States see higher rates of chronic disease and are faced with unique challenges related to their environment. Increasingly activities to address chronic disease are focused on community transformation aimed at the complex interaction between individuals, communities, and environments in a socio ecological approach to health education. Some rural local health departments have received funding for community transformation work (CTW), but it was unclear how implementation was occurring and who at the Local Health Department (LHD) was leading implementation efforts. This study utilized a qualitative exploratory multiple case study approach to understand the role the health educator in community transformation work in rural Illinois. It was found that health educators are leading CTW at rural LHDs. CTW is a shift from the traditional individual based health education work these practitioners have done in the past, but falls in line with the seven areas of responsibilities. Not all the health educators felt ready or prepared to do this work. The issue of resources, specifically funding to support staff time, continues to be an issue. Without sustained funding the start and stop, nature of the health educator’s work may continue and it may undermine efforts to reduce chronic disease. Full Text: PDF DOI: 10.15640/ijhs.v4n2a7