A joint effort by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Labor, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; this Guidance is for safe handling of solid waste contaminated with a Category A infectious substance and the proper management of inactivated Category A waste materials in the United States.
Terrorist attacks have a profound emotional and physical effect on a community. While preventing these attacks would be preferred, agencies must work swiftly and cohesively to improve patient outcome when an attack does occur. Read full discussion paper.
This FEMA InfoGram shares information on seismic activity around the “ring of fire”, law enforcement uses for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS aka drones), DHS accepting applications for Fellows, and details for Zika Virus webinar. Read the full InfoGram.
(TNS) – When “The Big One” hits in Western Washington, we’re likely to feel it in the Inland Northwest, but it might seem like nothing more than the shaking from a large truck rumbling past.
And rumbling past. And rumbling past.
Particularly on upper floors of multistory buildings, water in a glass might vibrate. Planters hanging from hooks might swing. Dishes in a cabinet might rattle.
Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services HHS launched an online collection of federal resources available to mitigate the health impacts of emergencies. Topics range from patient movement and hospital care to situational awareness and decontamination, with resources ranging from mapping tools and consultation services to personnel. The compendium is intended to support communities in emergency situations by helping them identify and access available resources.
Health care organizations play a key role in community resilience. Increasing incidents of extreme weather represent complex hazards that challenge accepted baseline assumptions for infrastructure capabilities, redundancies, and disaster preparedness and response. Climate change, by increasing the intensity and frequency of some extreme weather events, is introducing new levels of extreme weather threats and forcing a need for new building design thresholds.
In the devastation that follows a major disaster, there is a need for multiple sectors to unite and devote new resources to support the rebuilding of infrastructure, the provision of health and social services, the restoration of care delivery systems, and other critical recovery needs. In some cases, billions of dollars from public, private and charitable sources are invested to help communities recover. National rhetoric often characterizes these efforts as a “return to normal.” But for many American communities, pre-disaster conditions are far from optimal. Large segments of the U.S. population suffer from preventable health problems, experience inequitable access to services, and rely on overburdened health systems. A return to pre-event conditions in such cases may be short-sighted given the high costs—both economic and social—of poor health. Instead, it is important to understand that the disaster recovery process offers a series of unique and valuable opportunities to improve on the status quo. Capitalizing on these opportunities can advance the long-term health, resilience, and sustainability of communities—thereby better preparing them for future challenges. With support from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services), the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development), the Veterans Health Administration (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs), and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) convened an expert committee to develop an approach to disaster recovery that mitigates disaster impacts on health and promotes healthy communities.
The Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) issues the Ready or Not? report annually to provide the public and policymakers with an independent analysis about progress and vulnerabilities in the nation’s public health preparedness. The report assesses the level of preparedness in states, evaluates the federal government’s role and performance, and offers recommendations for improving emergency preparedness.
This report also aims to foster greater accountability for how effectively taxpayer dollars are used to improve the nation’s readiness for health emergencies. Without transparency, it is hard for the policymakers to assess how well prepared we are for the range of threats our nation faces.
The report:
Informs policymakers about the status of public health preparedness in the United States;
Provides greater transparency for public health preparedness programs;
Encourages greater accountability for the spending of preparedness funds;
Recommends ways to help the nation move toward a strategic, capabilities-based system able to respond effectively to health threats posed by diseases, disasters and bioterrorism
The Hospital Board’s Role in Disaster Readiness: Preparing for the Worst, Leading with the Best
Hospitals continue to fine-tune how their local disaster readiness plans and further detail how they will work with regional teams when disaster strikes. Although the hospital board of trustees is not responsible for the development and implementation of the hospital’s disater plan, it is the board’s fiduciary responsibility to ensure that a clear plan is in place and that the funding and resources necessary to carry out the plan are available.
Particular aspects of emergency care for children may be especially difficult for rural hospitals to meet as they often have less access to pediatric and emergency medicine trained physicians.
The attached study “Pediatric Care in Rural Hospital Emergency Departments”, was compiled using data analysis which compared rural and urban hospitals’ responses on various dimensions of pediatric ED care:
In 2007, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) contracted with the Center for Biosecurity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (Center) to conduct a two-year, comprehensive assessment of hospital preparedness in the U.S. from the time of the establishment of the Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) in 2002 through mid-2007 and to develop tools and recommendations for evaluating and improving future hospital preparedness efforts. Hospitals Rising to the Challenge: The First Five Years of the U.S. Hospital Preparedness Program and Priorities Going Forward is the second major deliverable for the project. It includes our assessment of the impact of the HPP on hospital preparedness from 2002 through 2007 and our preliminary recommendations for improving the state of U.S. hospital disaster preparedness.
Materials related to the April 28, 2009 teleconference which was facilitated and sponsored by CDC’s Public Health Law Program and the Coordinating Office of Terrorism Preparedness and Emergency Response.
