health preparedness exercises, and more frequent publication of such studies in the literature. The growing partnerships between public health agencies and schools of public health (i.e., the Academic Centers for Public Health Preparedness) would certainly contribute to such an effort.
At the committee’s March 2004, meeting, DHS ODP speakers presented a graphic describing a cyclical or building block approach to planning and training (see Figure G-2). This graphic outlines an incremental set of techniques or methods for preparedness planning and training, from the minimal complexity of a seminar to the significant complexity of functional or full-scale approaches. On the one hand, this building-block approach seems logical, and it is reasonable to select a training and capability testing method based on and scaled to match the complexity of the objective (e.g., a workshop to train for a particular role and then to test it; a functional exercise to rehearse and evaluate a complex interagency process). However, the committee believes this approach requires evaluation. For example, by what means are games determined to be more or less complex than tabletops, and in what circumstances is one method preferable to another? This type of evaluation research would help ensure the implementation of the most effective, evidence-based means for strengthening preparedness.