Minnesota Laboratory System for Public Health (MLS-PH ) Purpose and Description

1. Minnesota Laboratory System for Public Health (MLS-PH)Purpose and Description

2. Minnesota Laboratory System for Public Health (MLS-PH) Data-Users Partners • Local • Public Health • Health Care • Environmental • Police, Fire, Hazmat • State • Infectious Disease • Environmental Health • Pollution Control • Agriculture • Public Safety • Federal • FBI • CDC • FDA • EPA • Homeland Security Data-Generators Laboratories • Public Health • Health Care • Environmental • Agricultural • Food Safety • Veterinary Care Voluntary Integrated Statewide Network 2

3. Purpose of the MLS-PH • Integrate public/private sectors to enhance public health protection • Generate high quality, best practice laboratory data and results • Identify threats to individuals and the public during daily operations and emergency incidents • Communicate data/results to partners in a timely/useful manner • Implement effective responses by partners to: • Infectious agents and biological toxins • Hazardous chemicals, including radioactive • Newborn congenital or heritable metabolic disorders

4. Foundation Underlying the MLS-PH Development • In June, 2010, the MN Department of Health’s Public Health Laboratory convened a Laboratory System Improvement Program (L-SIP) to assess Minnesota’s PHL System. • The L-SIP assessment engaged over 60 stakeholders from across the system.

5. What We Learned From the Assessment • The assessment affirmed significant strengths in the current system. • The assessment revealed that there are three “domains” within the larger system–clinical, environmental and newborn screening. • The assessment identified specific areas for improvement.

6. What We Learned From the Assessment • Improvement Areas: • System structure formalization (who is supposed to do what, when and how?) • Communication across the system • Performance/Quality Improvement • Information sharing and exchange across the system • Research • Education and outreach • Resource development • Work force development

7. Post-Assessment • After the Assessment, the MDH-PHL received a grant to develop a team to outline an ideal State PHL system. • The Design Team worked over a 6 month period to outline an ideal system for Minnesota that could incorporate improvements identified during the assessment.

8. MLS-PH Ideal System

11. MLS-PH System Map • The Design Team established a MLS-PH System Map reflecting the overall system and roles and relationships within the system. • Review system map.

15. Relationship to Domains • The Steering Committee identifies priority areas of focus for improvements to MLS-PH. • The domains develop Collaborative Councils that identify the means to and accomplish improvements (some domains are already equipped to do this, others will be forming Collaborative Councils). • The Steering Committee tracks overall progress on improvements and shares it across the MLS-PH.

16. Relationship between Steering Committee and Domains Steering Committee Newborn Screening Environmental Clinical Collaborative Council Collaborative Council Collaborative Council

17. Example • The Steering Committee seeks to foster more collective research efforts across the system. • The Steering Committee asks each Collaborative Council to identify priority research focus areas within the domain and possible ways to pursue the priority areas. • Councils may develop collaborative research task forces that pursue the priority research focus areas for the domain.

18. Example • The Strategy Council establishes a system-wide communication through a website dedicated to MLS-PH. • An emerging issue develops and the Steering Committee notifies the Collaborative Councils and asks each Council to provide guidance and feedback on the issue. • The Steering Committee uses the information to recommend a particular approach to the issues and communicates back to each Council.

19. Steering Committee Focus During the First 12 Months • Communicate to stakeholders about the MLS-PH and the overarching governance system. • Solicit feedback from domains about the MLS-PH concept and ways to effectively communicate it. • Establish a dedicated, system-wide communications vehicle, beginning with a website and email list. • Work with Councils to develop domain-specific handbooks about the system that has system information and domain specific contacts.

20. Domain Feedback • What questions do you have about the MLS-PH? • How would the clinical domain foster formalizing the system? • What are potential roles a Collaborative Council might have in the clinical domain? • What system-wide issues do you think the Collaborative Council is well-positioned to address going forward?