A recent health report disclosed that the San Joaquin Valley received less public health funds despite having higher rates of poverty and diseases compared with other counties in California.

The report, “Operational and Statutory Capacity of Local Health Departments in the San Joaquin Valley,” was written by Dr. John Amson Capitman and Dr. Marlene I. Bengiamin. The report is from the San Joaquin Valley Public Health Consortium.

Capitman is executive director of the Central Valley Health Institute, a program under Fresno State’s College of Health and Human Services. He is also a professor of public health. Bengiamin is the research director of the institution.

The information was gathered through the eight county directors of public health and also graduate students.

The study was made by comparing the funds that all eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley received against other counties of similar population sizes in California, Bengiamin said.

The two main sources of the statistics gathered are the National Association of City and County Health Officers (NACCHO) 2010 and the National Profile of Local Health Departments data for California.

Despite the lack of funding, Capitman and Bengiamin found that the Valley’s public health departments were still doing as much work as other counties.

“The report found that the Valley’s counties are doing a lot,” Capitman said. “They are doing more services than their peers. They’re responding to challenges with less.”

Bengiamin said that the Valley’s counties are “overextending themselves” because even with less and limited funding, the public health departments are providing equal services and going “beyond that.”

If the Valley’s counties are underfunded, it is difficult for the public health departments to do what needs to be done, Capitman said.

“If our public health systems are underfunded, we’re going to be doing less than what we want to, less than what we need, too, in creating a healthy community that everybody wants”” that students want,” Capitman said.

According to the report, public health policies are focusing more on primary prevention and self-management of chronic diseases. However, California’s Mandated Health Services do not have clear assessments of the “capacity and impacts of public health on the communities they serve.”

Although California’s guidelines have similar requirements as the 10 essential public health services by the Center for Disease Control, the guidelines are not specific and clear enough, Bengiamin said. There are no standard guidelines across the board for the counties to follow.

“For the counties to be able to provide the services, which are the prevention services for the public, there has to be some kind of mandated statues and regulations across the board,” Bengiamin said. “Each county has different expectations for itself and provide different services. There are not really any measurements across the board.”

Bengiamin emphasized that public health does not only mean health care for the poor. It is about health care, prevention and safety of the public.

“We’re right now in the middle of talking about the Affordable Care Act,” Capitman said. “In the long run, the success of the program depends on a healthy community.

“People need to have a clear sense in taking care of themselves, but they may not have the capacity to do it for themselves because of where they live and their income. So these programs around public health are incredibly important to make a healthy community.”

Bengiamin said that health care policies should be changed to prevent a crisis. People should not wait for a crisis to happen to create a change in policy, she explained

Decision-makers and officials should be informed about the importance of public health, Bengiamin said.

“I don’t think there’s a realization on the part of the decision-makers and officials about what public health is and the extent of the lack of capacity for public health,” she said.