Welcome to CDC stacks |
Stacks Logo
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
Clear All Simple Search
Advanced Search
Assessment of capacity in 2012 for the surveillance, prevention and control of West Nile virus and other mosquito-borne virus infections in state and large city/county health departments and how it compares to 2004
  • Published Date:
    February 2014
  • Language:
Filetype[PDF-3.76 MB]

  • Description:
    In August 2013, CSTE—with technical input from CDC and assistance from the National Association of City and County Health Officers (NACCHO), the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) and the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL)—assessed state health departments and 30 local health departments (LHDs) with either direct access to ELC funding or a high WNV threat level based on previous experience to describe: (a) the jurisdictions’ current capacity to conduct surveillance for WNV and other mosquito-borne viral infections, (b) how current dedicated personnel are funded and (c) how capacity has changed since peak funding in 2004. The assessment partners shared an interest in the long-term sustainability of the national arboviral surveillance system (ArboNet) created in response to WNV.

    The assessment instrument was developed in May and June 2013. The 2004 assessment was used as a template to enable comparison. The earlier assessment used published CDC guidelines for WNV surveillance to identify and measure 21 indicators of capacities related to human, equine, avian and mosquito infection; laboratory capacity and programmatic prevention activities. New questions were added in 2013 to assess the number and sources of funding of staff dedicated to WNV surveillance, their functional role, needs for additional staff to achieve “full epidemiology and laboratory capacity to conduct WNV and other mosquito-borne disease surveillance” and changes (if any) made in the past five years in response to reduced ELC funding. Respondents were instructed to answer questions based on program activities in 2012. All 50 states, all six LHDs with ELC funding support and 15 of 24 LHDs with no direct ELC support submitted responses.

    This report was prepared by James Hadler, Consultant to CSTE, and Dhara Patel, Associate Research Analyst in the CSTE National Office, with data analysis assistance from Kimberly Miller, Rebecca Rutledge and Jessica Wurster, program interns in the CSTE National Office.

    This publication was supported by Cooperative Agreement Number 1U38HM000414-05 from CDC. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC.

    We gratefully acknowledge the workgroup that developed the assessment tool and reviewed the final report. Workgroup members include Roger Nasci and Lyle Petersen from DVBD/NCEZID/CDC, Paul Etkind and Lilly Kan from NACCHO, Jane Getchell and Kelly Wroblewski from APHL, James Blumenstock and Abraham Kulungara from ASTHO, James Hughes from Emory University School of Public Health, and Alfred DeMaria, Kristy Bradley, Jennifer Lemmings, and Jeffrey Engel from CSTE.

  • Document Type:
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Supporting Files:
    No Additional Files
No Related Documents.
You May Also Like: