Public Health Preparedness Capabilities Planning Model

These programs in state level would cater health service on basic levels to rural areas and also the urban areas. However, There must be the same rules and regulations for health care services across the state as well as the country and the access to minority groups to health care services must be fast and continuous in rate. The positives of state flexibility in health care certainly outweigh the negative in that some states have more growth than other states, therefore in these situations, the levels of health care may differ. As population and development grows in a state, the health care industry must grow, thus increasing the need for new technology. "Due to the needs of vulnerable populations and the requirements necessary to make health insurance coverage for them viable, these programs are quite different from standard private health insurance plans (Teitelbaum & Wilensky, 2013)." Private state insurance health care plans have the flexibility of choosing what groups they want to cover and what type coverage they will pay for. Medicaids concern for the needy is ethical and moral, illness or injury doesn't

According to" Public Health Infrastructure - Healthy People" (n.d.), "Public health infrastructure includes 3 key components that enable a public health organization at the Federal, Tribal, State, or local level to deliver public health services. These components are:

In the event of a disaster, the community relies upon the public health personnel to evaluate the needs of the community, assess the available resources, provide reliable information, and coordinate health activities. It is essential that local health workers are trained professionals who are reassuring and organized to address health, social, cultural and material concerns of the community. Local health personnel coordinate social services, transportation, available health services, volunteers, outside assistance, public utilities and rescue work (HELP, 1989).

A team of researchers from The George Washington University in conjunction with key leaders – evaluated the Detroit area to assess the state-of-healthcare deliverance to those in need. The problem was presented in a clear and concise manner: The uninsured and poor had limited to no access to the care they needed. Many resorted to the Emergency Department (40% of admissions were non-emergent), leading to overcrowding in the hospital. Those that are part of the safety net are providers of the poor and vulnerable populations: hospital systems, clinics, volunteers, primary care workers, and prevention workers that are there to prevent the overflow and influx that we see in the assessment. We will be addressing our main stakeholders, the

The years 1996 to 1997 brought about another wave of health care reform for Massachusetts. The expansions in 1996 and 1997 resulted in an increase in the number of people enrolled in MassHealth (Massachusetts Medicaid program). As well, one of the key elements of Massachusetts’s safety net is

The rising cost of health insurance has been an issue that many states have had to struggle with across the country. The state of Minnesota is one of these states in which spiraling health care have increased regardless of cuts to health and human services programs. Budget analyses for the state of Minnesota clearly indicated that new strategies are needed to reduce the growing rate of health care spending.

The Massachusetts model is considered by many to be the blueprint for the national health care reform. It was introduced in the year 2006 and was fully implemented by 2010. The state previously had a “free care” pool through which it funded the health care given to people who were uninsured and ineligible for Medicare, Medicaid and private health insurance. The then federal government insisted that either the state reduced this funding or it lost $385 million in Medicare funds (Lizza, 2011, June 6). The uninsured population in the state at that time was 10.9%, which was much less than the national average of 15.8% (Day & Nardin, 2011) making the state relatively more suitable for any health

Healthcare is one of the significant functions of every state government. In the state of Iowa, one of the organizations that play a major role in ensuring Iowan’s community health is the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH). Does IDPH effectively manage to ensure quality health services in Iowa considering the ever growing population and the demographic differences exhibited by the state’s inhabitants? If it does, how does it do it? This study is a report on Iowa Department of Public Health. The report intends to answer the questions posed above and to provide comprehensive information about the organization.

Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Denton is a 255-bed hospital featuring more than forty three specialties, the hospital is located adjacent to a major highway which is used to transport hazardous materials, commuters and cargo. Texas Health Presbyterian Denton is a suburb of the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, which has an estimated population of seven million residents and covers a geographical area of approximately 9,000 square miles. The Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex is the largest metropolitan area in the South and the fourth largest in the United States. The purpose of this paper will be to evaluate the Texas Health Presbyterian Denton’s Emergency Operation’s Plan to determine if it address a comprehensive response to threats, emergencies and disasters while safeguarding the welfare of its citizens.

The U.S. State Health Departments and Services function to promote public health through research and development, policy enterprises, and multiple service programs. Often, they provide community-based services. From this perspective, these organs have varied public health and social function systems, making their operations, structure, resources, and service specialization different from one state to another. This paper compares and contrasts the Arkansas Department of Health and Illinois Department of Public Health as far as their health systems are concerned.

The disaster which hit the Maricopa County in the State of Arizona in September 2014 was a major disaster that necessitated the community preparedness for leading successful response and a prompt recovery. Besides emergency managers, many officials and the private are involved in the processes. Some of these stakeholders are public health, public safety, and municipal officials. Collaboration is needed for getting all those involved in the processes to interact accordingly. This paper addresses the major collaboration strengths between emergency responders, public health, public safety, and municipal officials to deliver accurate response and recovery during the event, the main weaknesses of the collaboration among all those that were involved in the efforts, and recommendations for improving the collaboration between the stakeholders.

From the perspective of a health care administrator, I will identify, develop, and discuss strategic issues in planning a model by prioritizing issues facing a community when dealing with a natural disaster using the four MAPP assessments that align with the shared community mission. Lastly, I explain how you would promote collaborations among clinical professionals, explain methods that encourage physician leadership in patient care enhancement, and explain quality initiatives that reduce organizational risk and support patient safety.

The National Response Framework is a guide designed to assist local, State, and Federal governments in developing functional capabilities and identifying resources based on hazard identification and risk assessment. It outlines the operating structure and identifies key roles and responsibilities. It established a framework to identify capabilities based on resources and the current situation no matter the size or scale. It integrates organizational structures and standardizes how the Nation at all levels plans to react to incidents. The suspected terrorist attack will have health, economic, social, environment and political long-term effects for my community. This is why it is essential that local government’s

This includes virtually any governmental action needed to control the threat to the population. Therefore, in order to fulfill that responsibility to ensure the public's health state public health authorities could (as they have in the past) temporarily constrain certain civil liberties. They can require private sector participation in public health objectives, shut down potentially harmful industries, destroy contaminated property, deport or prevent the entry of individuals who may infect others, ration supplies, and control the flow of information (Hodge, 2002).

The Constitution distribute public health powers into two categories the federal government and the states (Gostin, 2000). The Federal government, when it comes to public health have the control over taxing, spending, and regulating the activity of buying. Federal public health powers include the authority to tax, spend, and regulate interstate commerce. This control allows the Federal government to gain access to more money, distribute materials, resources, and to continue catch the public's interest (Gostin, 2000). Each individual State have taken on some of this public health power. For example, to help protect, maintain, and promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the people (Gostin, 2000). Public