TABLE 4—
Relationship Between the Percentage of Public Health Emergency Response Funds Allocated and State-Reported Barriers to Allocation Identified in Grant Reports of State Health Departments: United States, October 2009–May 2010
| State Variable | % of PHER Funds Allocated, B (SE) | % of PHER Funds Allocated,a B (SE) |
| Individual barriers | Omitted | |
| Regulatory | −5.6 (10.5) | |
| Contracting | −26.4* (10.6) | |
| Purchasing | 20.4* (10.0) | |
| Legislative | 2.3 (12.5) | |
| Staffing | −8.2 (9.6) | |
| Funds transfer | −0.3 (12.7) | |
| Experienced 3 barriers | Omitted | −16.0 (8.85) |
| No. of public health emergency preparedness staff per 100 000 persons | 0.9 (1.5) | −0.3 (1.43) |
| Regionb | ||
| South | 14.1 (10.7) | 1.3 (9.3) |
| Midwest | 7.1 (9.25) | 4.8 (9.5) |
| West | 7.7 (9.23) | 5.1 (9.0) |
| State population sizec | ||
| Medium | −4.9 (7.26) | −2.1 (7.1) |
| Large | 5.1 (12.0) | −2.6 (10.1) |
| Centralizationd | ||
| Decentralized | 13.1 (10.1) | 3.7 (9.1) |
| Mixed or shared | −5.0 (11.3) | −7.6 (11.7) |
Note. PHER = public health emergency response.
a
As of March 2010.
b
Northeast is the reference region.
c
Small (population < 4 000 000) is the reference size. Medium is defined as population = 4 000 000–8 999 999. Large is defined as population ≥ 9 000 000.
d
Centralized is the reference level of centralization.
*P < .05.