Printer-friendly version Print this page
In 2009, the Georgia Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Branch’s (EHB) management and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health used the Environmental Public Health Performance Standards (EnvPHPS) to conduct an assessment of Georgia’s Environmental Health (EH) programs and operations within the framework of the Ten Essential Environmental Health Services.1 This statewide assessment identified a need for improvement of monitoring and evaluation which supported the EHB’s previous decision to fully implement a statewide solution for data recording, reporting, and analysis needs in environmental health, known as the Environmental Health Information System (EHIS).2 Currently, the EHIS provides access to Environmental Health inspection data for 131 of the 159 counties within Georgia. From a cursory review of food, pools and tourist accommodation inspection reports, there appear to be inconsistent violation markings, written observations, and corrective actions. After further inquiry into the process, the barriers to correcting these inconsistencies appear multifaceted and widespread. A systems thinking model demonstrated that the short-term fix of providing EH training to new employees without continual assessment or evaluation shifts the burden away from the long-term solution of developing a comprehensive EH training development and evaluation process. This project is intended to strategically intervene on mental models and processes that prevent the EH training from meeting its intended purpose, which is to assure a competent workforce that conducts, and documents proper risk factor assessment, management, and communication through consistent inspections. As a result, we intend to develop a comprehensive training development and evaluation plan to focus on improving instruction, management involvement, and employee engagement using the framework of the EHB Career Track3, the national core competencies4, and resources in academia, federal agencies, and the Department. Note: These documents have not been revised or edited to conform to agency standards. The findings and conclusions in these reports are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.