Consequential Public Engagement at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Caitlin Wills-Toker, PhD Presented at th...
Why Latest “Enhanced” Version of Public Engagement Was Started?  <ul><li>Citizen comment at a congressional public hearing...
Background on Public Engagement At CDC  <ul><li>2005-2006 Public deliberation pilot projects on pandemic influenza --- “pr...
2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>1. Both the desire for advice + the decision on the table are r...
2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>4. Both active agency staff + sufficient resources are committe...
2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>7. Both unbiased information + neutral facilitation are provide...
Model of a Consequential Public Engagement Table (CPET) <ul><li>4+ geographic areas represented </li></ul><ul><li>100 citi...
Projects To Date 2005-09 <ul><li>Community control measures for pandemic flu—2006 </li></ul><ul><li>CDC goals selection—20...
Projects to Date 2005-09 <ul><li>5. Six State Demonstration Projects on Pandemic Influenza Policy, 2008-09 </li></ul><ul><...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Caitlin Wills Toker

1,029 views
931 views

Published on

This was a presentation from the November 2009 workshop in the Open Government Directive Workshop Series.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,029
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
36
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Caitlin Wills Toker

  1. 1. Consequential Public Engagement at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Caitlin Wills-Toker, PhD Presented at the Open Government: Strategies and Tactics from the Play Book Meeting November 16, 2009
  2. 2. Why Latest “Enhanced” Version of Public Engagement Was Started? <ul><li>Citizen comment at a congressional public hearing in 2001… </li></ul><ul><li>“ Your CDC research is “dead on arrival” </li></ul><ul><li>Working together on policy decision was chosen as a trust-building approach </li></ul><ul><li>Goal was to build more trust over the long term between government and citizens </li></ul>
  3. 3. Background on Public Engagement At CDC <ul><li>2005-2006 Public deliberation pilot projects on pandemic influenza --- “proof of principle” that the public can reach a productive outcome on an important CDC policy question. </li></ul><ul><li>CDC has had a strategic imperative to be “customer centric” </li></ul><ul><li>Workshop on Public Deliberation in 2007 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>24+ previous projects involving some form of public participation </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. 2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>1. Both the desire for advice + the decision on the table are real. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Both adequate time to deliberate + clarity of purpose are provided. </li></ul><ul><li>3. Both knowledge of facts + attachment to values underlie the choices to be made. </li></ul>
  5. 5. 2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>4. Both active agency staff + sufficient resources are committed to the process. </li></ul><ul><li>5. Both impartial citizens-at-large + partisan stakeholders participate. </li></ul><ul><li>6. Both a critical mass + diverse group of persons participate. </li></ul>
  6. 6. 2x10 Principles of Consequential Public Engagement <ul><li>7. Both unbiased information + neutral facilitation are provided. </li></ul><ul><li>8. Both genuine dialogue + thoughtful deliberation occur. </li></ul><ul><li>9. Best option is chosen + and agreed-upon </li></ul><ul><li>10. Public’s advice receives “serious consideration” + participants obtain candid feedback about the decision </li></ul>
  7. 7. Model of a Consequential Public Engagement Table (CPET) <ul><li>4+ geographic areas represented </li></ul><ul><li>100 citizens representative of the population by age, race, and sex in each area (N=400) </li></ul><ul><li>Day long dialogue and deliberation events </li></ul><ul><li>Stakeholder representatives from key sectors affected (N=30-40) </li></ul><ul><li>Two day long meetings for stakeholders before and after the citizens meetings </li></ul>
  8. 8. Projects To Date 2005-09 <ul><li>Community control measures for pandemic flu—2006 </li></ul><ul><li>CDC goals selection—2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Vaccine priorities II—2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Identification of at risk populations for pandemic influenza---2008 </li></ul>
  9. 9. Projects to Date 2005-09 <ul><li>5. Six State Demonstration Projects on Pandemic Influenza Policy, 2008-09 </li></ul><ul><li>6. Priorities for the National Vaccine Plan, 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>7. Criteria and Priorities for the CDC Vaccine Safety Research Agenda, 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>8. Target Level of Preparedness for the H1N1 Mass Vaccination Program, 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>9. Components of a National Vaccine Safety System, 2009-10 </li></ul>

×