From healthmaps@home.com Tue Oct 10 08:18:16 2000 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id IAA54958 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:18:15 -0700 Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.84]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id IAA27409 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:18:14 -0700 Received: from c501552d ([24.19.225.248]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20001010151702.NYQA4090.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@c501552d> for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:17:02 -0700 From: "Health Maps" To: Subject: RE: GIS course Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:18:11 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Yes they are. There is a BIG problem with DOH/s listserve and it is supposed to be fixed to day. I will send you the ftp site as soon as Tony Varella sends it to me. Sorry about the delay, but .... Richard E. Hoskins WA State Department of Health 1102 Quince Street Olympia, WA 98504-7812 richard.hoskins@doh.wa.gov tel: (360) 236 - 4270 fax: (360) 236 - 4245 GMT -8 Note: All messages to and from the Department of Health may be disclosed to the public. -----Original Message----- From: WAPHGIS-owner@u.washington.edu [mailto:WAPHGIS-owner@u.washington.edu]On Behalf Of Scott LaMontagne Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 6:50 AM To: 'waphgis@u.washington.edu' Subject: GIS course Dick, I've been out of the office for the last month and am not sure if you have already posted a message about this on the listserv, but I was wondering if the notes and lectures from the GIS/Maptitude summer course that I attended this past June have been posted on the Web yet? I'm gearing up for a Maptitude project and having those notes will help refresh my memory. Thanks. Scott D. Scott LaMontagne, MPH Research Analyst Center for Health Training 1809 7th Ave Ste 400 Seattle, WA 98101-1313 (206) 447-9538 (206) 447-9539 FAX slamontagne@jba-cht.com -----Original Message----- From: Dick Hoskins [mailto:rhoskins@home.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 2:16 PM To: waphgis@u.washington.edu Subject: Re: GIS/state health depts 1. Not really. Lots of activity but not clear what the direction is. I think this is common with health departments. They fall in love with GIS but not much happens. Like any other activity, it needs a solid funding stream, an informed management about the potential (and realistic capacity) of GIS for public health. Several health departments have started GIS units and then ruined them with politics and yanking funding away just as they were getting to critical mass, so to speak. Management seldom gets past the notion that GIS is for just making maps and health department scientists seldom realize that GIS is a scientific analysis tool. GIS people get stuck in between and often do not bridge the gap. Often that is because GIS people know very little about how GIS is applied to public health problems. 2. The two (now one- one was laid off due to budget cuts or similar) GIS analyst is in the information services dept. Not clear why. None of the managers know anything about GIS. Often organizations fail to understand that just because GIS uses computers and data(bases), or builds them, that does not make them an information technology unit. GIS is not "data processing", it is an analysis unit and belongs with a scientific unit managed by public health practitioners. In my view it is important that GIS analysts in health departs have epidemiology training or are given training. Those who come in as geographers with GIS skills tend to adapt to public health the quickest and most effectively. GIS people who come to GIS strictly from the technical side may never get the point of GIS for health unless they get good training (like at least summer course in epi ) and work on a GIS/health project that has as a result something that could not have been obtained any other way except through the use of GIS. I would stress using GIS for analysis and not for display and presentation. 3. Putting together coverage for others to access, does some GIS programming, some projects. I really do not know the details. 4. Communicable disease GIS is done by me right now (epidemiologist), mostly in developing with a internet programmer an internet application to display tables, charts, maps from a newly developed communicable reportable disease database with an emphasis on spatial process modeling and analysis. Will be ready in a few months. If you want to integrate GIS into daily activities, you need most of all, effective training for the health dept staff and that the management make it clear that projects have a geographic orientation if appropriate. Training means not just learning how to make maps in ArcView or whatever, but how to use spatial analysis, apply geographic principles, spatial statistics, etc. Also GIS software needs to available to everyone from the start with little cost to a particular office or program. It should be funded the same way the word processing software is, that is as infrastructure software. The "gee whiz" factor runs very thin for management after the GIS group makes a web page or two, or makes a lot of maps for reports and presentations, and puts a lot of coverages on the agency intranet. If this is all that happens the return on investment will appear very low. It is essential that management see GIS adding unique dimensions to studies or programs. If that doesn't happen, then GIS will sink. This can be avoided with a very carefully thought out (not consultant thought out) strategic that has executive management support. It is important that there is an executive manager who supports and sponsors GIS and takes the time for his/her personal learning about the technology and analysis potential. Every GIS manager knows what it is like to have executive management who has no clue what the technology is or what it can really do. Also it is important that you start small and build slowly and develop a track record of successful projects with careful budget management while selecting software and computers that fit the needs of the problem and not the other way round unless you have a management mandate with clear objectives and goals. GIS managers in health departments must do their own thinking - there are very few GIS consultants and no vendors that know anything about public health although some pretend they do. Organizations who have no clear plan concerning how GIS will be used and implemented often spend a lot of money and then after a couple years when still not much appears (which might be very reasonable), management opts out and spends the money elsewhere. Dick Hoskins rhoskins@home.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Blythe" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 10:24 AM Subject: GIS/state health depts I'm trying to find out how state health departments are integrating GIS into their regular activities (particular those related to communicable diseases). As such, I'd like to know: 1. Does your state's health department have something like a GIS coordinator (i.e., someone responsible for integrating GIS into the entire department's activities)? 2. If so, where is this person situated within the organization? 3. What other reponsibilities does this person have? 4. Does your state have a GIS coordinator within communicable diseases epidemiology? Any information you can provide is appreciated. David Blythe, MD, MPH Maryland Department of Health & Mental Hygiene email: dblythe@dhmh.state.md.us .