JOURNAL OF Environmental Health · PDF filecompetency-based model would potentially ......

JOURNAL OF

twe

lve

do

lla

rsEnvironmental Health

Published by the National Environmental Health Association www.neha.org

Dedicated to the advancement of the environmental health professional Volume 76, No. 2 September 2013

September 2013 • Journal of Environmental Health 3

QUESTIONS?

WHO CAN I CONTACT

FOR ONLINE

FOOD SAFETY COURSES?

WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR FIELD EVALUATION

OF EQUIPMENT?

HOW CAN I TELL IF A PRODUCT HAS BEEN

EVALUATED FOR SANITATION?

WHERE CAN IFIND INFORMATION ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL-RELATED

CLAIMS?

WHY DO WATER

SAMPLES HAVE SUCH A SHORT SHIPPING

WINDOW?

CONNECT WITH THE EXPERTS.No matter the question, trust UL to help you find the right answer. Our experienced team is dedicated to providing the technical support you need to ensure safe, code-compliant installations.

UL.COM/CODERESOURCE OR CALL 800.595.9844

WHEN DO THE NEW FEDERAL LEAD LAW REQUIREMENTS TAKE

EFFECT?

JOURNAL OF

Environmental HealthAdvAncement of the SCIENCE

Examination of the Association Between Announced Inspections and Inspection Scores .................8

Food Safety Training Needs at Evacuation Shelters Operated by Faith-Based Organizations ..........14

Promoting Healthy School Environments: A Step-by-Step Framework to Improve Indoor Air Quality in Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana ........................................................................22

International Perspectives: Listeria monocytogenes Strains Isolated From Dry Milk Samples in Mexico: Occurrence and Antibiotic Sensitivity ....................................................................32

AdvAncement of the PraCtICE

The Development of a Standards-Based National Curriculum Framework for Regulatory Food Safety Training in the United States .................................................................38

Direct From CDC: InFORM: An Innovative, Integrated Food Safety Meeting ......................................44

AdvAncement of the PraCtItIoNEr

Demystifying the Future: Hi, I’m a Robot and I’m Here to Take Your Job ............................................46

Legal Briefs: Food Safety and the Global Supply Chain .......................................................................48

Career Opportunities ........................................................................................................................50

EH Calendar ......................................................................................................................................52

Resource Corner ................................................................................................................................54

Accredited Environmental Health Science and Protection School Listing ........................................56

Your aSSoCIatIoN

President’s Message: An Evolution of Environmental Health: NEHA Adapts and Embraces Change ...........................................................................................................................6

Special NEHA Members ....................................................................................................................59

Special Listing ...................................................................................................................................60

NEHA News ......................................................................................................................................62

NEHA 2014 AEC ...............................................................................................................................66

NEHA’s Annual Financial Statement .........................................................................................68

Managing Editor’s Desk: Pivoting Toward a Younger NEHA Membership ...........................................70

Dedicated to the advancement of the environmental health professional Volume 76, No. 2 September 2013

Our cover feature this month, “The Development of a Standards-Based National Curricu-lum Framework for Regulatory Food Safety Training in the United States,” describes the

process leading to an integrated national food protection training curriculum framework. The curriculum framework grew out of a recognition by the Food and Drug Administra-tion of the need for systematized training for regulatory food protection professionals as part of an integrated food safety system. Having a consistent training program provides assurance that these employees are doing comparable and competent work, and a competency-based model will potentially reduce the burden of foodborne illnesses in the U.S.

See page 38.Cover illustration © iStockphoto | allanswart

A b o u t t h e C o v e r

A d v e r t i S e r S i n d e x

American Public University ...............................13

Comark Instruments, Inc. ..................................31

Custom Data Processing.....................................43

Decade Software .................................................71

HealthSpace USA ................................................72

InspekPro ...........................................................53

NEHA Certification in Comprehensive Food Safety Credential ..................................Insert

NEHA Training .....................................................5

OnlineRME, LLC ................................................31

Ozark River/Integrity Distribution .....................51

Shat-R-Shield ......................................................55

Sweeps Software, Inc. ........................................13

Taylor & Francis Group .....................................57

Taylor Technologies, Inc. ...................................31

Underwriters Laboratories ...................................2

38 Volume 76 • Number 2

A d vA n c e m e n t o f t h e PracticeA d vA n c e m e n t o f t h e Practice

IntroductionThe need for a consistent and accessible stan-dards-based training regimen for regulatoryfood protection professionals has been deter-mined to be of national strategic importanceas a result of a renewed focus by the Foodand Drug Administration (FDA) in creat-ing an Integrated Food Safety System (IFSS)(FDA, 2009). Additionally, the Food SafetyModernization Act (FSMA) of 2011, the firstmajor national legislation on food protectionin more than 70 years, recognizes and callsfor training for state and local regulatoryofficials. FSMA also directs FDA to invest infood safety programs for its state and local

partners, which supports the IFSS strategy ofjoining food safety efforts at all levels of gov-ernment into one unified system.

The success of IFSS is dependent on thenation’s ability to properly and consistentlytrain the estimated 45,000 federal, state,local, tribal, and territorial regulatory foodprotection professionals responsible forprotecting the vast majority of our foodsystem. Besides creating an assurance thatthese employees are doing comparable andcompetent work, consistently training reg-ulatory food protection professionals to acompetency-based model would potentiallyreduce the burden of foodborne illnesses

in the U.S. and thereby improve the publicconfidence in the food supply.

In the absence of a vision such as IFSS, aclear, career-spanning training plan or sys-tem for regulatory food protection profes-sionals has not existed. Nor has centralizedinformation been available on training orprocesses for ensuring the content, quality,and instructional effectiveness of availablecourses. Additionally, although a variety offood safety training courses are offered bypublic agencies, educational institutions, andprivate companies, a certification process hasnot existed to indicate that the regulatorshave achieved competency in performing theresponsibilities of their jobs. In the currentenvironment of budget constraints and jobcuts, efficient use of resources is more impor-tant than ever.

To provide a vision and roadmap for anintegrated, open-source, career-spanningfood safety regulatory training system, a cur-riculum framework for an IFSS was devel-oped over the past three years by the Inter-national Food Protection Training Institute(IFPTI) in Battle Creek, Michigan. Thistraining vision received financial and techni-cal support from FDA.

The framework was originally designedas an open-source cataloging system to helpidentify 1) content areas in which regulatoryfood protection professionals should receive

Abst ract In response to the recognized need for a training system

to support an integrated food safety system in the U.S., the International

Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI) in Battle Creek, Michigan,

designed a career-spanning curriculum framework. IFPTI collaborated with

a national curriculum team consisting of regulatory officials and university

academics. The curriculum framework encompasses and organizes existing

professional development for the estimated 45,000 federal, state, and local

food regulators in the U.S. into efficient, standards-driven learning paths.

This article describes the development process leading to an integrated

national food protection training curriculum framework.

craig Kaml, edd International Food Protection

Training Institute

Kieran J. fogarty, Phd College of Health and Human Services

Western Michigan University

Gerald Wojtala International Food Protection

Training Institute

William dardick, Phd Graduate School of Education and

Human Development George Washington University

Allan Bateson, Phd Office of Regulatory Affairs

Food and Drug Administration

Julia e. Bradsher, Phd christopher c. Weiss, Phd

Global Food Protection Institute

The Development of a Standards-Based National Curriculum Framework for Regulatory Food Safety Training in the United States

0 tables, 1 figure


A d vA n c e m e n t o f t h e Practice

training, 2) competencies associated with each content area, and 3) food safety courses available across the U.S. As a result of inven-torying existing food safety courses, IFPTI completed a compilation and categorization of over 700 currently available training and educational courses leading to the develop-ment of the Food Protection Course Cata-log (International Food Protection Training Institute, 2011).

Critical IssuesTo develop a competency-based integrated training system and ensure its scientific integ-rity, the critical developmental issues were addressed as follows:1. Developing terminal learning objectives

for four professional levels.2. Mapping general and technical compe-

tencies (knowledge, skills, and abilities [KSAs]) to the terminal learning objectives.

3. Identifying content areas in which regu-lators should receive training throughout their careers.

4. Mapping general and technical competen-cies to the curriculum framework.

5. Mapping existing food safety and protec-tion courses to the framework.

The Development MethodIFPTI used a custom development process to develop the curriculum framework. This process 1) helped create a framework to guide food protection professionals’ indi-vidualized career-spanning learning paths; 2) allowed a gap analysis of existing train-ing opportunities; 3) informed course development prioritization to address unmet needs; and 4) identified the need for, and guided the development of, a course review process for food safety course own-ers or providers who want their courses included in the framework.

The development of the curriculum framework utilized a back-mapping curricu-lum design process that is commonly used to plan results-based professional development (U.S. Department of Education, 2006). The process involves determining desired train-ing outcomes and then designing a system to achieve those outcomes. IFPTI initiated the back-mapping process by periodically convening a curriculum team of national leaders in regulatory food protection. The team identified terminal learning objectives

for each of four professional levels (entry, journey, technical, and leadership) and across four performance dimensions (tech-nical, programmatic, communication, and management/leadership).

As part of the development process, IFPTI instituted a number of curriculum evaluation and assessment efforts to mea-sure curriculum-associated outcomes. IFPTI emphasized the development of the curriculum against a set of quality practices that comply with the American National Standards Institute/International Associa-tion for Continuing Education and Train-ing (ANSI/IACET) 1-2007 Standard for Continuing Education and Training (ANSI/IACET, 2011). The steps undertaken, start-ing with the back-mapping process, enabled IFPTI to take an analytic approach to iden-tifying and analyzing quality learning events, establishing appropriate assessment criteria, and monitoring and improving the learning process.

The framework went through continu-ous refinement by the curriculum team, the IFPTI Stakeholder Advisory Council, and Association of Food and Drug Officials mem-bers. Several competencies and content areas were eliminated while others were added. The final framework comprised 58 technical and general competencies and 133 content areas, encompassing both general and tech-nical areas of expertise.

The Curriculum Framework StructureThe curriculum framework was designed to demonstrate the interrelationship between, among, and the possible progression through, four professional levels as well as to represent content areas within the profes-sional levels and tracks. The professional levels reflect the hierarchy of the cognitive domain of Bloom’s Taxonomy (Huitt, 2009), which is an established model that helps educators develop training and education for specific audiences.

The basic structure of the framework (Figure 1), depicted in a multi-tiered, color-coded grid, consists of the following: 1. Content areas: each box of the curriculum

framework represents a topic, or subject, in which regulatory food protection profes-sionals should receive training. Each con-tent area can contain multiple courses from any training provider across the nation. The

content areas provide a means to map com-petencies and to catalog and sequence any available courses.

2. Professional levels: four levels of content areas and competencies relevant to job responsibilities.a. Entry level—new hires (regulators who

have been on the job for up to approxi-mately two years).

b. Journey level—a more experienced level at which many regulators spend the majority of their careers.

c. Technical specialist level—regulatory food protection professionals with spe-cific, focused areas of expertise, such as pasteurization or emergency response.

d. Leadership level—middle- and upper-management positions.

3. Professional tracks: specific areas of specialization.a. Unprocessed—raw food product pro-

duction (i.e., farms).b. Manufactured—processing raw ingredi-

ents into ready-to-consume food.c. Retail—distribution of ready-to-con-

sume food, including restaurants.4. Spanning content areas: content areas that

cover multiple professional levels or tracks.a. Level-spanning (vertical)—content areas

that are pertinent to more than one pro-fessional level, e.g., the IFSS implemen-tation content area pertains to journey, technical, and leadership levels.

b. Track-spanning (horizontal)—content areas that are pertinent to more than one professional track, e.g., at the journey level, the IFSS content area is relevant for all three tracks (unprocessed, manu-factured, and retail), and the imports content area is applicable to the manu-factured and retail tracks.

Within the professional levels are con-tent areas that regulatory food protection professionals at those levels should master as well as content areas relevant only for certain professional tracks. For example, all journey-level regulators would take courses in communication skills, food emergencies, food transportation, law, and risk analysis, among others. Only someone in the manu-factured track, however, would need to take courses in areas such as additives, animal food processing, and packaging, and only someone in the retail track would have to take courses in catering and food prepara-



tion techniques. All technical specialists would learn about risk analysis and food emergency response, but only those in the unprocessed track would be required to learn about animal drugs and medicated feed. By the time regulators reach leadership positions, they could have potentially taken career-spanning courses in content areas such as advocacy, legislative affairs, policy making, and change management.

At all four levels, professionals would receive training in emerging food safety issues (level-spanning content area) such as new scientific findings and legislation/regulations with a bearing on their work such as FSMA.

The benefits of the curriculum frame-work are numerous. The framework can, for example: 1. Provide guidance to food protection pro-

fessionals in planning their career paths and receiving the necessary training as their jobs evolve.

2. Help supervisors create career improve-ment paths for their employees.

3. Foster the efficient use of resources—money can be spent to develop courses that address competencies.

4. Provide a road map and standards for pub-lic, private, and academic outfits seeking to offer food safety training.

5. Assure federal agencies like FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture that regu-lators are being trained consistently and systematically, thereby boosting the agen-cies’ ability to rely on these regulators and prevent duplication of services.

6. Foster integration of the food safety sys-tem by encouraging greater collaboration among all stakeholders (government agen-cies, industry, agriculture, and academia).

7. Improve understanding of food safety by elected officials who make legislative deci-sions affecting the system.

8. Help food protection professionals prepare for certification exams.

Alignment With Federal InitiativesFDA emphasizes that training should meet the ANSI/IACET 1-2007 Standard for Con-tinuing Education and Training. In addition to designing and developing training to spe-cific standards, FDA has also moved in the direction of meeting outside accreditations. For example, FDA’s New Hire Investiga-

tor Certificate Program is accredited under ANSI and the American Society for Testing and Materials International E2659 Standard Practice for Certificate Programs.

In accordance with this standard, FDA designed a certificate program for new investigators using the results of a job task analysis (JTA), a formal process used to determine the tasks, activities, major job functions, and attributes that a person must have to fulfill the work requirements and responsibilities of a position. The FDA has already conducted a series of JTAs for various regulatory food protection profes-sional positions. The results of these JTAs will enable FDA and other training and certification organizations such as NEHA to meet best practices in training and cer-tification identified within FSMA by pro-viding a common body of knowledge upon which both training and certification can be based. Additionally, these analyses will be mapped to the IFPTI curriculum frame-work to inform the regulatory food pro-tection profession of where competencies can be addressed and where efficiencies in training can be achieved.

Additionally, the results of the JTAs com-plement the back-mapping process. The JTA approach strengthens the curriculum framework by identifying the tasks, KSAs, and competencies important for each profes-sional level, track, and content area. Mapping the JTA outcomes will validate the curricu-lum framework, identify areas for modifica-tion, and provide a body of knowledge that can be used to develop future training.

A clear indicator of the validity and use-fulness of the final version of the curricu-lum framework is its relationship to FSMA. Multiple sections of FSMA call for increased training of regulatory food protection pro-fessionals. When FDA’s Partnership for Food Protection mapped the training require-ments that are identified in FSMA onto the curriculum framework, the mapping pro-cess revealed that the framework addresses all of the training goals that the new law is designed to achieve.

Training Applications for Food Regulators Eventually, the curriculum framework is expected to provide the basis for competency testing and certification, currently the focus

of NEHA under an FDA grant, with IFPTI continuing to work on sequencing courses in the various content areas to map out a clear and logical progression of learning objectives toward competency and certification. The curriculum team catalogued more than 700 food safety courses offered by universities, colleges, industry, training institutes, and government agencies in the Food Protection Course Catalog. By mapping those existing courses to the curriculum framework, the team was able to identify gaps in the training infrastructure and create a prioritized train-ing development plan.

For example, at least 50% of the frame-work content areas did not contain any courses. Of the 50% of the content areas that did contain courses, only a small percentage of the courses was directly relevant to food safety regulatory job tasks and skills other than providing a general base of knowledge. Most of the courses relevant to regulatory food protection professionals were designed for entry-level regulators. The framework development process clearly showed that a need exists for new courses to fill cer-tain gaps. IFPTI is working with multiple organizations and educational institutions to develop new courses that will fill these training gaps. With current budgetary situ-ations, many states have out-of-state travel restrictions, which require training orga-nizations to use strategies to make train-ing readily available within each state. As the effort to improve regulatory food safety training progresses through the use of the curriculum framework, distance learning may play a key role. Many states no longer have regional offices for food safety inspec-tors, and as a result, inspectors are often a mobile and distributed workforce with unique training requirements. Distance- and blended-learning solutions could allow field-based inspectors to receive necessary training through online access, minimize time away from their job, and maximize in-classroom training time.

The curriculum framework can be used to identify content areas that should be covered within competency- and standards-based training programs. As a result of a compe-tency analysis for future leaders, IFPTI devel-oped the Applied Science, Law, and Policy: Fellowship in Food Protection, a national training program accredited by ANSI and ini-



International Food Protection training Institute Curriculum Framework

FIGURE 1

CEU = continuing education unit; BSE = bovine spongiform encephalopathy; HACCP = hazard analysis and critical control points; ICS = incident command system.

Budget

Policy Making

Stakeholder Support

Animal Drugs

BSE Investigations

Medicated Feed

Non-Medicated Feed

Rendering Plants

Seafood/Shellfish

Tissue Residue

Acidified Foods (AF)

Biotechnology and Nanotechnology

Dietary Supplements

Economic Adulteration

Infant Formula

Juice HACCP

Medical Foods

Web Site Reviews

Specialized Process

Standardization

Retail C

oncentrationE

lectives

Aquaculture

Dairy

Seafood/ Shellfish

Additives

Animal Food Processing

Commodity-Specific

Feed

Food

Milk or Milk Products

Meat and Poultry

Packaging

Seafood/ Shellfish

Active Managerial

Control

Catering

Cottage Foods

Food Preparation Techniques

Food Service

Grocery

Plan Review

Vending, Temp., Other

Imports

Food Defense

Microbiology

Public Health Principles

©2013 IFP

TI

Certificate and C

EU Issuance

Professional Level P

rogram C

ertificates

Instructor Development

Executive Programs

Integrated Food Safety System Implementation

Leadership ProgramsFuture Leaders Programs

Annual Updates

Emerging Issues

Sampling

Regulatory P

rogram Foundations

Entry Level

(Know

ledge) L1–1000

Technical S

pecialist (M

aster) L3–3000

Leadership (Leadership) L4–4000

Public Relations

Practicum

Risk Analysis (Management,

Assessment, and Communication)

Good A

gricultural Practices (G

AP

s)A

llergensFood P

rocessing and Preservation

Food Salvage and D

isposalForm

ula Review

Jurisdiction

Labeling

Prevailing Statutes,

Regulations, and Ordinances

Unprocessed Foundations

Manufactured Foundations

Retail Foundations

Allergens

Communication Skills

Employee Safety

Environmental Health Safety

Epidemiology

Food Defense Awareness

HACCP

Inspections, Compliance, and

Enforcement

Integrated Food Safety System

Orientation

Traceability and Recalls

Integrated Food Safety S

ystem


rogram C

ertificates


rogram C

ertificates

Project

Managem

entR

isk Analysis

Ingredients and Additives

Communication Skills

Epidemiology, Foodborne Illness Investigation, and

Response

Food Emergencies (ICS)

Food Transportation

Investigation, Sampling Techniques, and

Laboratory Methodology

Law

Preventive Controls

Professional (Soft) Skills (e.g., Time Management,

etc.)

Audit

Electives

Research Design

Statistical Analysis


rogram C

ertificates

Food Animals (Eggs)

Produce (Sprouts, Leafy

Green Vegetables)

Food Defense

Vulnerability A

ssessment

(CA

RV

ER

+ Shock, etc.)

Food Em

ergency Response

(ICS

)

Unprocessed C

oncentrationE

lectivesM

anufactured Concentration (Labeling,

LAC

F, AF, etc.)

Electives

Legislative Affairs

Aseptic Processes

Pasteurization

Manufactured C

oncentration

Retail HACCP/ Variance

Resource Leveraging

Seafood HACCP

Electives

Low-Acid Canned Foods (LACF)

Program/Grant Management

Risk Analysis (Management and Communication)

Advocacy

Change Management

Continuity of Operations

Food Systems and Sustainability

Human Resource Management

Journey Level (A

pplication) L2–2000

(Applied

Inspection Techniques)

Unprocessed C

oncentrationE

lectivesE

lectives

Retail C

oncentration (Labeling, etc.)

Science and Technology


A D VA N C E M E N T O F T H E PraCtICE

tially funded by FDA. This unique 12-month certificate program is aimed at improving the critical-thinking, problem-solving, and deci-sion-making skills of midcareer food regula-tors, boosting their leadership potential and strengthening the capacity for IFSS.

ConclusionPotential applications of the curriculum framework extend to academia, other pub-lic and private sectors, and beyond the U.S. to food safety professionals abroad. The adoption of the framework has the poten-tial to significantly shape secondary and higher-education programs leading into the profession of food safety and protection in both the regulatory (public) and industry (private) sectors. Currently, people enter-ing the regulatory food protection profes-sion tend to have science degrees such as microbiology or chemistry but no specific knowledge of how their academic concen-trations apply to food safety and defense. As colleges and universities are increas-ingly adding more courses related to food science and food safety to their curricula, the framework can help these institutions determine the content and sequencing of the courses and better prepare their gradu-ates for the workforce.

Just as the current curriculum framework lays out core competencies for food pro-tection regulatory professionals, the cur-riculum framework could be customized for public sector health professionals such as veterinarians, laboratory workers, and

epidemiologists. Such curriculum frame-works could help foster greater consistency and availability of training opportunities in those fields and truly address the training needs of IFSS.

The curriculum framework could also be customized for private sector professionals in the unprocessed, manufactured, or retail tracks, and could lay out the core competen-cies required for employees throughout the supply chain: growers, harvesters, line work-ers, equipment installers, sanitarians, manag-ers, and food service workers.

Additionally, the curriculum framework can be modified to fit the needs of food protection professionals internationally. In response to international interest, the frame-work has already been translated into Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, Russian, Spanish, and Turkish. While the framework will require customization depending on the country, the current content areas constitute a good foun-dation for discussing competency-based food protection training for food safety regulators in a global food safety system.

By establishing a competency- and stan-dards-based training vision for regulatory food protection professionals, the curriculum framework is helping the U.S. make the goal of an IFSS a reality. Working with other food protection professionals in public and private sectors in the U.S. and other countries to adapt the framework to their needs may also help realize the possibility of a safer global food supply.

SummaryThe need for a consistent and accessible standards-based training regimen for food protection regulators is well established in FSMA, the first major national legislation on food protection in more than 70 years. IFPTI and partners, through a roadmap pro-cess, have developed a competency-based, career-spanning food protection training curriculum framework for regulatory and public health officials in all jurisdictions (federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial). The curriculum framework provides career pathways, fosters efficient use of resources, and ensures consistency and collaboration in an open-source training environment. Potentially, if food protection regulatory professionals are consistently trained to established competencies utilizing the inte-grated food safety system curriculum frame-work, the burden of foodborne illnesses in the U.S. may be lessened, and as a result, the public may have more confidence in the food supply.

Disclaimer: This article reflects the views of the authors and should not be construed to represent FDA’s views or policies.

Corresponding Author: Craig Kaml, Vice President of Curriculum, International Food Protection Training Institute, 49 W. Michi-gan Ave., Suite 300, Battle Creek, MI 49017. E-mail: [email protected].

American National Standards Institute/International Association for Continuing Education and Training. (2011). Standard for con-tinuing education and training 1-2007. Retrieved from http://www.iacet.org/the-iacet-standard/ansiiacet-standard

Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Establishing a fully inte-grated national food safety system with strengthened inspection, lab-oratory and response capacity. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForFederalStateandLocalOfficials/UCM183650.pdf

Huitt, W. (2009). Bloom et al.’s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.html

International Food Protection Training Institute. (2011). Food Pro-tection Course Catalog. Retrieved from http://assets1.mytrainsite.com/501446/ifpti_existing_food_protection_course_catalog.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). Back mapping: A pro-cess for results-based staff development. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/admins/tchrqual/learn/nclbsummit/gentile/edlite-slide005.html

references

Lodging

RecreationalWater

Food Protection

ComplaintsServiceRequests

Wells

Septic

CDP‐Owned Tier 3 Data Centers

Hosting ‐Network Operations

Interoperable Systems

100% ‘browser’ web‐

based.

Federal, state and local Environmental Health clients nation‐wide.

2012 Crumbine Winner

uses our full suite of EH applications.

CDPmobile ‐ the most

intuitive form‐filling data‐capture interface imaginable on the market today for use on tablets.

All development

performed in U.S.

Data centers are CDP owned and operated in the U.S.

Fully‐staffed software

development and maintenance line of business providing architecture, requirements, system design, coding, testing, and implementation and support services.

Portfolio includes 30 years of design, development and implementation of large scale workflow management, data collection, transaction processing and business intelligence solutions for use within the government health management environment.

Specializing in redundant system componentry designed for high availability and supported by multiple, fully independent and redundant telecommunications links.

Only Environmental Health Software vendor with experience/breadth of full suite of Public Health programs:

Clinic WIC WIC EBT Public Financials

cdpehs.com [email protected]

800.888.6035

CDP’s success is based on a fundamental set of beliefs: since our clients serve the public - we must uphold the highest level of support, value, and ethics. Evidence of this success can be found in our longevity of service, our reputation, and our references - none more valuable than our longstanding clients.

Copyright 2013, National Environmental Health Association (www.neha.org).

JOURNAL OF Environmental Health · PDF filecompetency-based model would potentially ......

Documents

Transcript of JOURNAL OF Environmental Health · PDF filecompetency-based model would potentially ......