Recorded presentation

Peter J. Fos, DDS, PhD, MPH¹, Walter J. Jones, PhD², K. Mills McNeill, MD, PhD³, and Brian W. Amy, MD, MPH³. (1) Dean and Professor, College of Health, The University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Dr., #10075, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001, 601-266-4866, pfos@msdh.state.ms.us, (2) Department of Health Administration and Policy, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Avenue, Charleston, SC 29425, (3) Mississippi State Department of Health, 570 East Woodrow Wilson, Jackson, MS 39215

In recent years, state public health departments have discovered that developing and administering effective systems for bioterrorism response requires the resolution of a series of formidable challenges. To establish its response mechanisms, the Mississippi State Department of Health began developing a state all-hazards response plan in FY 1999. The MSDH has had to develop satisfactory working relationships with many local, other state and federal agencies, academic institutions and non-governmental entities. A Memorandum of Understanding entailing bioterrorism cooperation was formulated by the public health departments of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi. In carrying out all of these activities, the MSDH has had to engage in a considerable amount of bureaucratic diplomacy, since organizations have often found that they have differing and conflicting visions of their respective roles in preparedness and response. Sometimes this has created difficulties in coordinating nationally directed activities at the state level, particularly with the smallpox vaccination program. In four years of program development, the MSDH has learned a number of important lessons about improving internal and external communications; the careful drawing of contracts to ensure common understanding of requirements and expectations; the effective training of personnel for bioterrorism response; and the close monitoring of grant requirements and the flow of funds through project management. Most fundamentally, the MSDH has had to handle the inter-organizational politics that are an inevitable part of collaborative efforts. The lessons learned by the MSDH have important implications for other states undertaking development or expansion of cooperative bioterrorism response programs.

Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the session, participants will be able to

• Identify and respond to the differing views of roles in bioterrorism preparedness and response held by participating organizations.
• Identify and begin to develop effective methods for interorganizational communication, contract drawing, personnel training and grant management.
• Recognize and effectively respond to interorganizational political factors that might hinder effective cooperation.

Keywords: Bioterrorism, Collaboration

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.

Recorded presentation