<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><channel>
<title>CDC Chatter</title>
<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 14:47:00 -0400</pubDate>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/</link>
<description>CDC Chatter</description>
<language>en-us</language>

<webMaster>feedbac&#107;&#064;&#099;dcchatter.net</webMaster>
<item>
<title>A CDC Save Award Idea</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=828</link>
<description>A CDC submission for the SAVE awards; incentivize less expensive lodging, with the potential to save millions in travel costs if adopted.  

</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 14:47:00 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>PH Informatics Lost in Health IT Initiatives?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=827</link>
<description>A recent OpEd piece in Government Health IT journal points out that public health is taking a back seat in the health insurance reform and push for &quot;meaningful use&quot; of electronic medical records.

(See the Government HealthIT article Minding the public's health IT)

Are public health informatics initiatives being led by CDC truly at risk, or will this prove to be an opportunity to reboot PHIN for more meaningful use among state/locals?</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:25:05 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Outbreak response?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=826</link>
<description>Article on recent presscon by Dr F in regards to latest outbreak and CDC's planned response.  Should the EOC be re-activated again?  Would you volunteer for this response effort?

See the story on CDC's announcement of  US outbreak 
</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:32:23 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>More organizational improvement?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=824</link>
<description>The Office of the Associate Director for Program (OADPG) spreads its wings on intra and internet.  New home for winnable battles and QPRs among other things.

See the CDC internet site  Office of the Associate Director for Program (OADPG)
</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:28:02 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CDC Changes Mold Website Info </title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=823</link>
<description>CDC, in a long overdue action, recently changed its information on the www.cdc.gov/mold website. CDC mold information changes followed the World Health Organization's publication, WHO Guidelines to Indoor Air Quality: Dampness and Mould (July 2009) and pressure from an advocacy group to improve its online information.

For more information on the CDC changes, visit CDC Updates Mold and Your Health to include WHO info
</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 19:28:20 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>A new way to engage with State/Local Health Officers?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=822</link>
<description>Health Officials’ Orientation—First of Its Kind
CDC Connects, 6/8/10

&quot;New state, local and territorial health officials attended an orientation at CDC recently to introduce them to the agency and provide an opportunity for collaboration with seasoned health officials, CDC subject matter experts, and senior leaders. CDC/ATSDR Director Thomas Frieden, MD, MPH, envisioned the orientation as a way for CDC to work collaboratively with health officials to achieve common health goals....&quot;


A new format for connecting with new local health officials, probably influenced by Dr F's experience as a Health Commissioner.  Does it sound like a program that is likely to meet the objective of &quot;a way for CDC to work collaboratively with health officials to achieve common health goals&quot;?

</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 23:45:09 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Congressional report prompts fear and anger over lead in D.C. water</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=821</link>
<description>CDC at middle of controversy on dangers of lead in DC drinking water per 2 recent articles in the Washington Post  by Carol Leonnig.

&quot;Federal and local political leaders, D.C. parents and health advocates reacted Thursday with a mixture of anger and fear to news that a federal agency misled them about the harm that lead in the District's water had caused -- and might still be causing.
</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 23 May 2010 21:50:34 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Hiring practices - reform in the air?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=820</link>
<description>Listen to Jennifer Ludden's story on NPR Obama Tells Agencies: Speed Up The Hiring Process

Read the WP article and the memo Obama issues hiring reform memo
by Ed O'Keefe, in the 5/10/10 Washington Post

&quot;President Obama is ordering federal agencies to make changes to how they recruit and hire new employees, stating in a memo to agency bosses that the complexities and inefficiencies of the federal hiring process have deterred qualified applicants from joining the federal payroll.&quot;</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 22:20:43 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>So this is how we recognize science at CDC?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=819</link>
<description>By inviting the “Science Czar” John Holdren to speak at the Shepard Science Awards? Run a Google search on him and you'll find many interesting articles, such as the Examiner article 'Science Czar' John P. Holdren's disturbing beliefs about America, capitalism and humanity

</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 15:20:07 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>To be (anonymous) or not to be</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=818</link>
<description>As we consider the future of CDCChatter, one area under consideration is whether to continue the practice of completely anonymous comments or to at least require a pseudonym so readers have some sense of the writers. Whether you are a fan of syphie or not, at least we know when s/he is posting and have some sense of the person behind the comments.  

How do you think Chatter should handle this?  AR
</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Management at CDC</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=817</link>
<description>CDC management -- am I the right fit? Problems and Conflict</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:13:47 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CDC Performance in Haiti</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=816</link>
<description>Read the Huffington Post article Health in Haiti: Lessons to Learn for National Public Health Week 2010

So what do we think about CDC's involvement in Haiti?</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>NCCDPHP moving from Koger?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=815</link>
<description>Apparently there is a 20 year limit on how long the government may lease a building.  I was told that CDC has leased the Rhodes building for 20 years and can no longer continue that lease.   A new location (along the 85 corridor or around Northlake) has been put out for bids and those in the Rhodes building have been told they will move in about 6-18 months - depending on whether a building is immediately available, simply needs some remodeling or has to be built.</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Emergency Management/Plans Positions</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=814</link>
<description>Emergency Management/Plans Positions</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 Apr 2010 20:44:01 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>I See Budget Cuts for CDC in the Future</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=813</link>
<description>As Health Care takes more and more resources just to defend.</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:16:08 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Long distance telecommuting?</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=812</link>
<description>I hear through the grapevine that CDC is cracking down on long-distance telecommuting (even though long distance telecommuting is not against HHS telework rules) and in the future will not allow it except for a limited time in special situations.  Are there a lot of long-distance telecommuters at CDC?  Has this been causing a problem or being abused?  I also hear through the grapevine that this crackdown is the CDC director's idea.  Does anyone know anything about this issue?  Are there any long distance telecommuters in your unit?</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 01:40:31 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Winnable Battles</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=811</link>
<description>What do you think about the &quot;winnable battles&quot;?</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 01:39:29 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>CDC's proposal for new quarantine regs scrapped by HHS</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=810</link>
<description>Former AJC reporter Alison Young reports in USA Today: &quot;The Obama administration has quietly scrapped plans to enact sweeping new federal quarantine regulations that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention touted four years ago as critical to protecting Americans from dangerous diseases spread by travelers.&quot;

Read the rest of the USA Today article Obama administration scraps quarantine regulations
</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 01:38:20 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Training at CDC</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=809</link>
<description>Training at CDC: Is it Enough?</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:18:47 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Talking to the Boss.</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=808</link>
<description>Two details announced indicating need for GS 14-15 staff to manage communications with the Director?  From our experience and what I have heard from others, communication with Dr F entails a boatload of preparation, hours of staff time, powerpoints and emails by the hundreds flying back and forth prior to each interaction, instructions on the amount of time and required beverage, and now 2 GS 14s to manage this process full time.  

How complicated should it be to talk to the boss? 
</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 23:53:59 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Stand up for CDC's Budget - call Congress today</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=807</link>
<description>With CDC based in Atlanta Georgia, you would think the Georgia Congressional Delegation would trip over themselves to stand up for this agency. Now you can give them the chance. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:14:24 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Clearance and scientific integrity at CDC</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=806</link>
<description>Strengthening Science in Government:
Advancing Science in the Public’s Interest

Search for &quot;CDC&quot; in this report and you will find a lot of interesting comments and quotes.   For example, the report says

&quot;CDC’s policy calls for clearance standards that “balance the concerns of quality and timeliness,” and a timeline that should generally not exceed one month (unless the author is asked to make revisions).  In practice, scientists report that delays in the clearance process are common. '

“We need supervisors who have the courage to speak up for the science.” – CDC branch chief       '

Clearance at CDC over the past years has become a very lengthy and time consuming process in which &quot;too many cooks spoil the broth&quot;, and goes beyond scientific issues into the arena of spin. I don't think this is getting any better with the new regime - in fact it may even be getting worse.  Apparently Frieden's office tried to interfere at the last minute with some recent CDC papers that were about to be  published in a leading medical journal..  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>OIG Report on Contract Irregularities</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=805</link>
<description>Recently the OIG conducted an audit of contract irregularities, specifically looking at an 8a contract that had an unprecedented award number and amount to one of four contractors on the vehicle.  While the OIG found no procurement irregularities (amazingly), they found serious infractions of the FAR and the Civil Service Act.  To briefly summarize, contracts that place contract staff on-site at CDC may be providing personal services which violates the FAR and may be replacing inherently government services which violates the Civil Service Act.  Here is the link to the report:

Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Compliance With
Appropriations Laws and Acquisition Regulations—Contractor A


</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 08:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>What CDC needs at this point is a strong leader, not a micro-manager</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=804</link>
<description>What is the state of employee morale at CDC?

</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:15:57 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>PMAP time again</title>
<link>http://cdcchatter.net/index.php?name=News&amp;file=article&amp;sid=803</link>
<description>The &quot;live&quot; all hands session on PMAP, supervisory training on PMAP and various other actions to try to improve the process have not resolved the issues around this performance system. The union has filed a grievance around inclusion of conduct vs performance measures, review of PDs as part of process, objective criteria, etc. and their dissatisfaction with management efforts to improve the system.  They want a review of all member PMAPs since 2006, change of marginally successful ratings and related documentation, and annual upper management review in the future as part of the process.

Should PMAP be saved? If not, what elements should be included in a new system?

</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 12:26:37 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
