Meghan D. McGinty’s scientific contributions

Context: Governmental public health (GPH) agencies need a diverse, skilled, and motivated workforce to advance health and well-being, but they face a number of recruitment challenges. While there has been massive growth in public health degree programs and graduates, those with a degree in public health are underrepresented in the GPH workforce. Objectives: This study evaluates potential reasons undergraduate and graduate public health degree holders are underrepresented in the GPH workforce, assesses student awareness of and interest in GPH jobs, and identifies strategies for improved recruitment. Design: We conducted pilot focus groups to explore public health students' interest in working for GPH agencies, obstacles to employment, and how this career path could be better promoted. Setting and participants: Eight focus groups were conducted with a total of 33 participants at 3 universities and at the Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association. Participants were enrolled full-time in or graduated within the last year from a public health bachelor's degree program or a public health master's degree program. Undergraduates had declared a public health major and were in their senior year; graduate students were in their second year and actively job seeking; or participants graduated within the past 12 months. Main outcome measures: The focus groups sought to capture students' perspectives of GPH agencies and how they believe recruitment can be improved. Results: Participants described attractive job attributes including fulfilling, meaningful work; a position at a mission-driven organization; and the opportunity to make an impact on their community. Governmental public health agencies were viewed as bureaucratic, lacking innovation, and underresourced. Participants reported difficulties accessing and finding relevant job postings. Conclusions: Key to effectively recruiting and retaining new graduates is understanding their perceptions about/experiences with GPH agencies. While GPH jobs have desired attributes, participants reported that health departments are not effectively recruiting them.

Objectives: The Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) has periodically assessed the epidemiological capacity of states since 2001, but the data do not reflect the total US epidemiology capacity. CSTE partnered with the Big Cities Health Coalition (BCHC) in 2017 to assess epidemiology capacity in large urban health departments. We described the epidemiology workforce capacity of large urban health departments in the United States and determined gaps in capacity among BCHC health departments. Methods: BCHC, in partnership with CSTE, modified the 2017 State Epidemiology Capacity Assessment for its 30 member departments. Topics in the assessment included epidemiology leadership, staffing, funding, capacity to perform 4 epidemiology-related Essential Public Health Services, salary ranges, hiring requirements, use of competencies, training needs, and job vacancies. Results: The 27 (90%) BCHC-member health departments that completed the assessment employed 1091 full-time equivalent epidemiologists. All or nearly all health departments provided epidemiology services for programs in infectious disease (n = 27), maternal and child health (n = 27), preparedness (n = 27), chronic diseases (n = 25), vital statistics (n = 25), and environmental health (n = 23). On average, funding for epidemiology activities came from local (47%), state (24%), and federal (27%) sources. Health departments reported needing a 40% increase from the current number of epidemiologists to achieve ideal epidemiology capacity. Twenty-five health departments reported substantial-to-full capacity to monitor health problems, 21 to diagnose health problems, 11 to conduct evaluations, and 9 to perform applied research. Conclusions: Strategies to meet 21st century challenges and increase substantial-to-full epidemiological capacity include seeking funds from nongovernmental sources, partnering with schools and programs of public health, and identifying creative solutions to hiring and retaining epidemiologists.

Context: More than 80% of Americans live in urban areas. Over the past 20 years, an increasing number of local governmental public health departments, particularly those in big cities, have taken pioneering action to improve population health. This article focuses on members of the Big Cities Health Coalition (BCHC) who participated in the 2017 Public Health Workforce Interest and Needs Survey (PH WINS). If the impact of these health departments is to be sustained, they will require a workforce prepared for the challenges of 21st-century public health practice. Objective: To characterize workforce interests and needs among staff in 26 large, urban health departments who are BCHC members. Design: Administered PH WINS survey to staff in BCHC member health departments to assess perceptions about the workplace environment and job satisfaction; training needs; awareness of national trends; and demographics. Setting: In total, 26 of 30 BCHC member health departments, United States. Participants: In total, 7453 of 17 613 staff members (response rate 43.4%) from participating departments. Results: The workforce consists predominantly of women (75%) and people of color (68%). Staff is satisfied with their job (81%), the organization (71%), and pay (59%), but more than a quarter are considering leaving within the year. The agency's mission drives staff, but it lacks an environment fostering creativity and innovation. Training needs include budgeting/financial management, change management, and strategic thinking. Conclusions: BCHC departments must improve retention, provide opportunities for advancement, enhance communication between leadership and staff, foster creativity and innovation, and align labor allocation with disease burden in local communities. Findings from the second iteration of PH WINS allow a comprehensive, comparable analysis of the workforce across the 26 BCHC member health departments that participated. These data expand upon the ability to assess and monitor improvement in the workforce environment, job satisfaction, awareness of national trends, and training needs.

Context: A changing public health landscape requires local governmental health departments (LHDs) to have a workforce prepared to meet complex challenges. While previous assessments looked at organizational data on the LHD workforce, the Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey (PH WINS) is the first nationally representative survey to examine individual perceptions of training needs, workplace environment, job satisfaction, and awareness of emerging concepts in public health. Objectives: Characterize key interests and needs of the local governmental public health workforce. Design: Survey invitations were sent to individual LHD employees on the basis of a stratified sampling approach. The LHDs had to employ a minimum of 25 staff and serve a population of 25 000 or greater to be eligible for inclusion. Setting: 399 LHDs across the United States. Participants: A total of 26 533 LHD employees completed the survey (59% response rate). Results: The majority of local public health workers are female (81%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 78%-84%) and white non-Hispanic (68%, 95% CI: 64%-72%). Of the nearly quarter of workers who declared an intent to leave within the next year excluding retirement (22%, 95% CI: 19%-25%), the most common reasons included pay (46%, 95% CI: 42%-50%), lack of opportunities for advancement (40%, 95% CI: 38%-50%), and workplace environment (30%, 95% CI: 27%-32%). Across jurisdiction size and supervisory level, skills gaps were noted in budget and financial management, systems and strategic thinking, developing a vision for a healthy community, and change management. Conclusions: As the first nationally representative sample of the local governmental public health workforce, these data create a national benchmark against which LHDs can measure their workforce. Given the similarities found across LHDs serving different jurisdiction sizes, a unified approach to workforce development should be employed across all LHDs. The LHD leadership should address retention, reward creativity and innovation, improve communication between leadership and employees, and provide opportunities for advancement.

Context: Senior health officials of local health departments are uniquely positioned to provide transformational leadership on health disparities and inequities. Objective: This study aimed to understand how senior health officials in large US cities define health equity and its relationship with disparities and characterize these senior health officials' perceptions of using health equity and disparity language in local public health practice. Design: In 2016, we used a general inductive qualitative design and conducted 23 semistructured interviews with leaders of large local health departments. Thematic content analysis was conducted using NVivo 11. Participants: A purposive sample of senior health officials from Big Cities Health Coalition cities. Results: Health equity was conceptualized fairly consistently among senior health officials in big cities. Core elements of these conceptualizations include social and economic conditions, the input and redistribution of resources, equity in practice, values of justice and fairness, and equity as an outcome to be achieved. Senior health officials saw health disparity and health inequity as distinct but related concepts. Relationships between concepts included disparities data to identify and prioritize inequities, inequities creating health disparities, health equity to eliminate disparities, and disparities becoming inequities when their root causes are unjust. Some respondents critiqued health equity terminology for representing a superficial change, being inaccessible, and being politically loaded. Conclusions: Understanding how senior health officials conceptualize health equity and disparities can focus policy priorities, resources, and the scope of work undertaken by local health departments. Having a common language for health equity allows for policy and resource advocacy to promote the health of marginalized populations.

Objective: To identify essential knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) for and characterize gaps in KSAs of professionals working in large, urban health departments. Design: A survey was disseminated to potentially eligible supervisors within 26 of 28 health departments in the largest, most urban jurisdictions in the country. A supervisor was eligible to participate if he or she supervised at least 1 staff member whose highest level of education was a master's degree. Setting and participants: A total of 645 eligible supervisors participated in the workforce survey for a response rate of 27.1% and cooperation rate of 55.2%. Main outcome measure(s): Supervisors were asked to rate the importance of KSAs to their masters-level staffs' work and indicate their staffs' proficiency. Results: Fifty-eight percent of supervisors reported supervising staff with a master of public health/master of science in public health degree. More than 30% of supervisors indicated that all of the 30 KSAs were essential. Four of the top 10 KSAs rated as essential by supervisors pertained to the ability to communicate. The top skills gaps perceived by supervisors were professional staffs' ability to apply quality improvement concepts to their work (38.0%), understanding of the political system (37.7%), and ability to anticipate changes (33.8%). Conclusions: Public health practitioners receive training in methods, theories, and evidence-based approaches, yet further investment in the workforce is necessary to advance population health. A focus should be placed developing strategic skills rather than advancing narrow specialties. Findings from this research can guide the creation and implementation of training curricula and professional development programs offered within local health departments or targeted to their staff, as well as satisfaction of accreditation requirements. By focusing on building strategic skills, we can ensure a public health workforce that is equipped with the KSAs necessary to practice Public Health 3.0 and leaders who are able to serve as their communities' chief health strategists.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.