Bioterrorism and Public Health Preparedness Group III

Problem Statement Problem: Need for guidelines and adequate resources to coordinate electronic information for identification of and response to all hazards events

Dimensions of the problem Fragmentation of response systems (local, state, federal) Ineffective communication among responding agencies Variable technologies currently implemented without proof of effectiveness or improved outcomes Inefficient use of resources Ethical issues concerning privacy Legal barriers to sharing information across agencies Lack of evidence-based decisions

Rationale An ineffective all hazard system has the potential to harm each and every one of us.

Stakeholders- supporters –NACCHO, ASTHO and its affiliates –Assoc of Microbiology –Assoc of Public Health, Assoc of Schools of Public Health –CDC, HHS, DOD, DHS, VA –Private sector companies who manufacture technologies –ONCHIT (Office Of National Coordinator of Health IT) –Health IT –State EMS, Local EMS

Stakeholders-supporters Emergency managers Local/state governments (departments, elected officials (eg governors, NGAs), law enforcement officials EPA, Dept of Agriculture, Dept of Interior, Indian Health Service Dept of Justice (state/local councils) Voluntary organizations: eg Red Cross Veterinarians Medical schools Health plan insurers

Stakeholders-opposers –Public privacy groups –Fiscal conservatives –Some think tanks –AHA, AMA, subspecialty medical groups (liability issues, proprietary issues) –Commercial pharmacies

Plan of Action Coalition of supporters consisting of stakeholders, based on revenue and size (including ASTHO, NACCHO) National Governors’ Association Enlisting media support (via op-eds, etc)

Final policy plan Hybrid model –Federal guidelines and funding (with state OR local matching), with state and local implementation Office of the Committee on Health IT