News

By Sophie G. Wenzel, MPH, DrPH, CPH, CHES© and Laura Hungerford, DVM, NREMT, MPH, PhD, CPH, Department of Population Health Sciences, Virginia Tech

According to the de Beaumont Foundation’s 2021 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs (PHWINS) survey,¹ only about 14% of the public health workforce in the United States has a degree in public health. To address this gap, during the 2023-2024 academic year, the New River Academic Health Department, a partnership between Virginia Tech Population Health Sciences (VTPHS) and the New River Health District (NRHD), located in South Central Appalachia, partnered to develop a Certified in Public Health (CPH)/Public Health 101 exam review for NRHD staff. The sessions were open to all NRHD staff, regardless of their eligibility² to sit for the CPH exam.

Eligibility requirements for the CPH exam include a public health degree and/or years of work in the field. While our training focused on the CPH exam topics, we wanted to make sure that all NRHD staff were able to participate and receive the content even if they were not eligible to sit for the CPH exam. Many local health department staff do not have formal training in public health, so sessions like this can help increase the knowledge, confidence, and credibility of those with varied disciplinary backgrounds. Increasing their skills and confidence can help health department staff grow their leadership capabilities and ensure retention.

Based on their areas of expertise, nine faculty members from VTPHS taught 11 different 2-hour sessions on public health topics, using the domains of the CPH exam as a guide. At the time, the CPH areas of expertise were as noted in the diagram below (note that these were updated in summer 2024³):

To assess knowledge change and gather feedback, participants completed a retrospective pre/post survey at the end of the last session. The survey asked for participants’ perceived knowledge on all topics before the session and after the session using a Likert scale (1 – no knowledge, 2 – minimal knowledge, 3 – some knowledge, 4 – good knowledge, and 5 – superior knowledge). The survey also asked participants to share their feedback via open-ended comments about the class or topic. Faculty members who taught the classes also participated in short interviews to gather their feedback on the sessions. Between 12 and 21 NRHD staff participated in each session. Nine NRHD staff members filled out the final survey, and seven faculty participated in interviews.

The survey showed that NRHD staff knowledge was improved for all topics, with significant increase in scores for nine topics: biostatistics, epidemiology, leadership, public health law and ethics, infectious diseases, program planning and evaluation, program management, policy and public health, and health equity and social justice.

Participants’ qualitative comments were summarized into two themes.

• Teaching style: Participants enjoyed the use of real-world examples to illustrate the content and liked having access to sample test questions.
• Content and length of session: Some participants felt that some sessions were a bit rushed, but understood that this may be due to the amount of material that had to be covered. Some content, especially the more technical content like biostatistics, epidemiology, and program management, was harder to comprehend for those with little background in those areas.

Interviews with VTPHS faculty were very positive about providing the sessions and interacting with the NRHD staff. Data were categorized into three main themes.

• Engaged staff: Faculty appreciated the NRHD staff’s engagement.
• Rewarding and useful to faculty: Faculty benefitted from the opportunity to teach practice-based professionals. Some faculty who had been practitioners appreciated the opportunity to step back into the practice world. Several early-career faculty were grateful to make new connections at the health department.
• Need for a coordinator: One positive component that was mentioned was the need for someone to organize the series.

The primary goal of this initiative was to provide education that would be helpful to the health department staff and support additional credentialing. There was an unexpected benefit to faculty; new connections were made, new material was learned, and faculty members enjoyed their time with the health department staff. Most of the faculty said they would happily do it again.

These Public Health 101/CPH exam review sessions are just one way that academic programs and local health departments can meaningfully partner, either through an academic health department partnership, or just as a collaboration. An effective training coordinator can lead positive engagement that gives mutual benefit and builds further connections. 

Guest Authors: