This document summarizes a project to integrate Web 2.0 technologies into the work of local public health departments. Library staff and university partners worked with two health departments, one large urban and one small rural. They identified ideas for using blogs, wikis, social media, and other tools. A survey found that while staff were personally familiar with some technologies, they had concerns about professional uses, like maintaining privacy and dedicating work time. Lessons learned included the need for policy guidance and showing how technologies could efficiently help essential public health work.

1. Creating a Roadmap: Web 2.0Creating a Roadmap: Web 2.0
and Local Public Health Practiceand Local Public Health Practice
Gillian Mayman, Nancy Allee, Whitney Townsend, Anne Perorazio,
Hung Truong, and Jane Blumenthal
Health Sciences Libraries, University of Michigan
Alison Grodzinski, Prevention Research Center of Michigan

2. The BackgroundThe Background
• Blogs
• Wikis
• Podcasting
• RSS
• Social bookmarking
“Best class of the
entire conference”

3. The ProjectThe Project
Community partners: One large urban health
department and one small rural health department.
Goal: To integrate Web 2.0 technologies into the
work of local departments of public health.
Library staff: Public health librarians and library
technology staff.
University partners: Prevention Research Center of
Michigan.

4. The ProjectThe Project

5. The IdeasThe Ideas
Director’s
blog Internal
Policy Wiki
Google Docs for
work with
partners
MySpace page for
Healthy Sexuality
program
Doodle for
meeting
scheduling Social
Networking
with community
partnersAsk a Nurse blog
Second Life
house showing
asthma triggers
Staff
suggestions blog
MySpace page for
Tobacco Reduction
program
Sewage plans in
Second Life
Conference
presentations in
SlideShare

6. The SurveyThe Survey

12. Have you ever …

13. Blogs
• 39.9% read blogs at least
once a month
• 50% read blogs for
professional purposes
• 5.2% comment on blogs
monthly or weekly

16. “Not sure what purpose it would
serve.”
“Like to think I am not that
egotistical”
“I consider anonymous opinions an
unreliable source of information.”

18. “My kids haven't had time to teach me.”
“Have better ways to spend my time”
“I do not believe the County wants us to use
this web site”
“I think it is somewhat for young people,
with nothing better to do”
“Not good example for my children”

19. Media Sharing
• 47.6% use a media sharing
site at least monthly
• 63.7% use one only for
personal purposes
• 59.3% create and upload
resources
• 12.8% create resources for
professional purposes

20. Podcasting
• 1 person created a
podcast
• 75.5% listen less than
once per month
• 77.5% listen for
professional purposes

21. Collaborative Writing
• 22% find information on a
wiki daily or weekly
• 20.7% find information for
personal purposes only
• 4 respondents have edited
a wiki
• 78% never use a
collaborative writing web
site to work with others

24. “I know using it would become a habit and
that I'd waste far too much time on the
thing.”
“Do people just not want to speak face to
face anymore?”
“Colossal waste of time!”
“I don't play video games”
“Sounds boring”

26. I do not think this technology would be
useful to me

28. The Lessons LearnedThe Lessons Learned
• Focus groups are problematic
• Survey anonymity vs accountability
• Policy challenges
• Even when overworked, underpaid, and
understaffed, public health workers are
extremely enthusiastic about applying new
technologies to their work.

29. Thank you.Thank you.
Gillian Mayman
gmayman@umich.edu
Health Sciences Libraries
http://www.lib.umich.edu/hsl/
Local Public Health 2.0 Wiki
http://www.lib.umich.edu/hsl/projects/publichealth20/
This project is supported under a subcontract, NO1-LM-6-3503, CFDA 93.879, between
the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois and the University of Michigan.