CONTEXT: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) that included a historic investment in the public health workforce. PROGRAM: Charged with implementing this investment, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) launched the Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG). PHIG builds on CDC's experience working with state, local, and territorial public health departments and represents a new approach to strengthening the public health workforce. IMPLEMENTATION: Specifically, PHIG incorporates features that allow these public health departments to prioritize and tailor the funding to meet their communities' needs: 1) focus on workforce as core infrastructure, 2) streamlined programmatic and administrative requirements, 3) more equitable funding approach, and 4) enhanced support from national partners and CDC. DISCUSSION: The goal is to optimize the unprecedented opportunity afforded by ARPA and lead to a stronger public health workforce and infrastructure across the United States.

As part of the federal response to the opioid crisis, the Opioid Rapid Response Team project (2018-2019) was created to provide rapid short-term assistance to requesting US jurisdictions responding to an acute opioid-related event. The project used an approach that maximized overall value by leveraging existing federal resources and harnessing opportunities to meet project-specific objectives while also enhancing general response capacity at the federal, state, and local levels. This tandem capacity building for both opioid rapid response and general response focused on systems and operations, workforce readiness, technical assistance, and partnerships. In this article, we demonstrate the ancillary value that issue-specific response activities can contribute to broader public health response capacity.

Laboratory scientists of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other public health laboratories play a fundamental and increasingly complex role in implementing public health programs while ensuring laboratory safety and quality. In 2014, a series of laboratory safety incidents highlighted the need for improvement in federal and other government laboratories. One component of the CDC's response to these incidents was a new career-entry fellowship program, the Laboratory Leadership Service (LLS). Offering laboratory safety and quality training and leadership development for laboratory scientists, LLS is intended to create a pipeline of future laboratory leaders who prioritize quality and safety as a core part of their laboratory science and practice throughout their careers. LLS incorporates evidence-based practices such as the service-learning model, a competency-based curriculum, ongoing stakeholder engagement, and program evaluation to maximize the program's success. This article describes how the CDC created LLS as a workforce development measure to respond to an urgent public health need-to improve laboratory safety and quality-and presents key factors for success in quickly establishing the program.

BACKGROUND: Expert groups have recommended ongoing monitoring of the public health workforce to determine its ability to execute designated objectives. Resource- and time-intensive surveys have been a primary data source to monitor the workforce. We evaluated an administrative data source containing US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) aggregate federal civil service workforce-related data to determine its potential as a workforce surveillance system for this component of the workforce. METHODS: We accessed FedScope, a publicly available online database containing federal administrative civilian HHS personnel data. Using established guidelines for evaluating surveillance systems and identified workforce characteristics, we evaluated FedScope attributes for workforce surveillance purposes. RESULTS: We determined FedScope to be a simple, highly accepted, flexible, stable, and timely system to support analyses of federal civil service workforce-related data. Data can be easily accessed, analyzed, and monitored for changes across years and draw conclusions about the workforce. FedScope data can be used to calculate demographics (eg, sex, race or ethnicity, age group, and education level), employment characteristics (ie, supervisory status, work schedule, and appointment type), retirement projections, and characterize the federal workforce into standard occupational categories. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that an administrative data source containing HHS personnel data can function as a workforce surveillance system valuable to researchers, public health leaders, and decision makers interested in the federal civil service public health workforce. Using administrative data for workforce development is a model that can be applicable to federal and nonfederal public health agencies and ultimately support improvements in public health.

Twenty-five years ago, the 10 essential public health services were defined and disseminated1 and public health was charged with ensuring that our workforce had mastery of the competencies to deliver these services.2,3 Although these essential services remain a useful framework for the practice of public health, the concept of an effective public health worker has evolved in the intervening decades. The necessary skills and aptitudes now extend beyond the traditional competencies (eg, epidemiology) to focus on strategic and systems thinking, communication, and translating science to policy, along with the public health practitioner's role as chief health strategist.4–8 A subcommittee of the Public Health Functions Project Steering Committee laid out an agenda in 1994 to realize the vision of “Healthy People in Healthy Communities” and recommended actions in 5 main areas (national leadership, state and local leadership, workforce composition, curriculum development, and distance learning).1 Progress in each of these 5 areas has been documented,9–11 with particularly substantial advances observed in the last 5 years.12–16 From a federal perspective, we believe that the recent, increasing rate of these advances can be attributed to a few main factors. Collaboration among federal and other partners working at the national level has provided the necessary leadership. Partners have built upon each other's work rather than working in isolation. Accreditation of health departments has provided a consistent approach for strengthening state and local health agencies. Researchers have taken action and are building evidence that informs practice at the federal, state, tribal, local, and territorial levels. Nonetheless, gaps remain. Using the areas for action as a framework and a federal perspective, we highlight recent accomplishments and important areas for future attention to continue the path toward the public health workforce of the 21st century—a public heath workforce 3.0.

Public health is facing unprecedented opportunities and challenges. Health departments face shifts from less clinical service delivery to increased population-based services to address the growing burden of chronic diseases (eg, obesity prevention, tobacco and drug use prevention) and new responsibilities to collaborate with other sectors in conducting community needs assessments and data sharing (1–3). State and local health departments continue to be challenged by health policy changes, reduced budgets, and difficulty recruiting and retaining staff (2). These challenges need to be met with a public health workforce of adequate size, composition, distribution, and skills. Formally trained health educators are an important but often underutilized part of the workforce needed to meet such challenges. Although various health workers inform the public, many employers are unaware of the professional training and roles of health educators (4). Health educators (also referred to as health education specialists) address chronic and other conditions by applying their competencies to the design and execution of behavioral health and policy or systems interventions (4). This essay highlights how the skill sets of health educators can address current and future public health challenges, the need for improved health educator workforce data, and a call to action for various stakeholders to optimally deploy health educators to improve the public’s health.

Global health reflects the realities of globalization, including worldwide dissemination of infectious and noninfectious public health risks. Global health architecture is complex and better coordination is needed between multiple organizations. Three overlapping themes determine global health action and prioritization: development, security, and public health. These themes play out against a background of demographic change, socioeconomic development, and urbanization. Infectious diseases remain critical factors, but are no longer the major cause of global illness and death. Traditional indicators of public health, such as maternal and infant mortality rates no longer describe the health status of whole societies; this change highlights the need for investment in vital registration and disease-specific reporting. Noncommunicable diseases, injuries, and mental health will require greater attention from the world in the future. The new global health requires broader engagement by health organizations and all countries for the objectives of health equity, access, and coverage as priorities beyond the Millennium Development Goals are set.