Assoc of State & Territorial Directors Health Promotion & Public Health Educ

What it reported doing in 2015

Grant - centers for disease control and prevention: cooperative agreement to provide training and technical assistance in health promotion to state health agencies and their partners. Within the grant, there are 4 projects described below: shaping policy for health tm training on policy and environmental change: the grant provided support for the development and pilot testing of curricular and training materials; the recruitment, training, and quality assurance of trainers to provide the training; and evaluation of a copyrighted series of courses that teach public health professionals and their partners to examine the factors influencing health behaviors and respond with appropriate interventions. The grant also provided funding to train some cdc project officers and policy staff plus some people in designated high burden states to engage in efforts to create healthier states or communities. As used in the shaping policy for health courses, the term "policy" refers to a range of approaches, actions or interventions that are part of the policy process. The policy process can occur at the local, state, or national levels. Policies include workplace rules, insurance provisions, limitations businesses accept, local ordinances, joint use agreements (such as allowing the use of school facilities for community physical activity programs), changes to built environments (such as traffic calming measures and safer walking routes to schools), school board decisions, agreed upon ways of doing business, and state guidance-in addition to state or federal regulations, and local, state, or federal laws. The courses take participants through a broad spectrum from defining problems to evaluating the solutions. The university of North Carolina's gillings school of global public health developed the training curriculum and partners with dhpe for its distribution.fellowship program: dhpe's fellowship program launched in 2011. Fellows are selected competitively through interviews with both dhpe and prospective sites. Recruitment is through minority serving institutions, with former interns, and on idealist.org. The fellows, who are charged with addressing health equity in their work, determine their primary topic interest areas and dhpe matches them with appropriate health departments. The inaugural three fellows were placed at the state health departments in Virginia and Maryland and at a county health department in Georgia. Fellowships provide an avenue for helping state health departments accomplish more with limited resources while improving entry prospects for master's trained or post-doctoral professionals. In 2012, a second set of fellows started and were placed in Alabama, Mississippi, Minnesota, South Carolina and Georgia. In 2013, a third cohort of fellows were placed in Connecticut, Ohio and New Jersey respectively. The 2014 cohort of fellows were placed in Arkansas, Louisiana, d.c., and Georgia.internship program for students of minority serving institutions: in 2014, the internship program for students of minority-serving institutions cycled 38 students through internships. Students from federally designated historically black colleges and universities (hbcus) are eligible to apply, and the program now reaches additional hispanic-serving institutions (hsis). Each of three terms, the program receives about 120 applications, with numbers increasing for summer session. Students write essays describing their interest in an internship and are interviewed by staff. Selected interns are matched with placement sites, which can be at the community (e.g., a local health promotion organization), state (e.g., state health department), or national (e.g., cdc) level. Most are placed at community-based organizations. Dhpe maintains relationships with faculty of hbcus and hsis along with officials at placement organizations who serve as preceptors for the students during their internships. Dhpe produces six webinars for interns on topics related to pr

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
• Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
• Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
  • Compensation committee: Missing
  • Independent consultant: Missing
  • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
  • Written employment contract: Missing
  • Compensation survey or study: Pass
  • Board or committee approval: Pass
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
• Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: Pass
  • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 19%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: Limited
• Revenue growth: Limited
• Asset growth: Limited