<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>PHSChat Forums for USPHS Officers - Blogs</title>
		<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/blog.php</link>
		<description>PHSChat for USPHS Officers - U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps Officers</description>
		<language>en</language>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 17:15:53 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>vBulletin</generator>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Retire the President's Challenge]]></title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?123-Retire-the-President-s-Challenge</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:20:09 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*Should the Corps have two standards?* 
The Corps has two different and separate standards for measuring the physical capabilities of its officers;...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><b><font size="3"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font color="#000000">Should the Corps have two standards?</font></span></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font color="#000000">The Corps has two different and separate standards for measuring the physical capabilities of its officers; the President’s Challenge, and the Annual Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The metrics of these two programs are very different from each other: The President’s Challenge is self-assessed, while the AFPT is graded by a proctor.</font></span></font><br />
<font size="3"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font color="#000000">Participation in the President’s Challenge is commendable, but the President's Challenge has flaws. This leads to two awkward questions:</font></span></font><br />
<font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font size="3">(1)</font></span> </span><font size="3"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Can a Public Health Service (PHS) officer who routinely participate in the President’s Challenge activities achieve a passing score on the AFPT?</span></font></font><br />
<font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font size="3">(2)</font></span> </span><font size="3"><span style="font-family: Calibri">How creditable is the President’s Challenge if it does not require verification from a disinterested person?</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">For the interest of uniformity, the Corps should only have one program that measures physical fitness, and that program should be the AFPT.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Why should this matter? Promotion Boards</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Basic Readiness is an important component of the promotions boards. Both the President’s Challenge and APFT are considered equivalent for Basic Readiness requirements. How can this be fair? What type of message is this to the rank and file? </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The message is very clear: “The President’s Challenge is easier than the APFT. Nobody is watching you. Just type in the required information into a website, and then tell everyone you did it fairly”. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">By making the APFT the sole measurement for PHS physical fitness standards, ethical dilemmas concerning record keeping, for the President’s Challenge, would be eliminated.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">APFT is not unreasonable</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Public Health Service officers are not civilians; Part of the job requirement to be a PHS officer is to meet reasonable physical fitness standards. For most officers the minimum standards of APFT are achievable. To reach an acceptable APFT score requires a thoughtful and consistent training plan. It takes effort to prepare for the APFT, but with modest and regular physical training most officers can get a passing score.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>What if an officer can’t pass the APFT?</b></span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">If a PHS officer can’t meet the minimum standards of the APFT, that officer should not be eligible for the promotion board.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Final thoughts:</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">It’s not a good idea for the Corps to have two different physical fitness standards for Basic Readiness. Physical fitness standards should be determined by the APFT.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">An expected component of APFT is honesty among the participants. No PHS officer should ever want to submit an APFT score that might appear “irregular”.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Of course, there will be officers that cannot participate in APFT for various reasons. Medical waivers of APFT may be justified, but waivers will have to be determined individually. </span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Let’s sum it up:</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">This is an integrity issue. The President’s Challenge should be retired as a method to determine physical fitness for Basic Readiness.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">For the purpose of the PHS, the APFT is a superior method to determine physical fitness for Basic Readiness.</span></font></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?123-Retire-the-President-s-Challenge</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Please Don’t Wear Your PHS Uniform for Fundraising</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?122-Please-Don’t-Wear-Your-PHS-Uniform-for-Fundraising</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:18:46 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Recently, with honorable intentions, several Public Health Service (PHS) officers, in service dress blues, participated in a televised fundraising...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Recently, with honorable intentions, several Public Health Service (PHS) officers, in service dress blues, participated in a televised fundraising event for a local Public Broadcasting System (PBS) affiliate. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Anyone who has ever owned a television set understands that, periodically, local PBS affiliates have membership and pledge drives. Television fundraising is a method that keeps nonprofit PBS affiliates financially solvent. During these events volunteers answer phones and assist with the solicitation of pledges and memberships.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">It’s great that the Corp has officers that want to help local PBS stations. Volunteering for fundraising is commendable, but PHS officers aren’t supposed to wear their uniforms for fundraising. </span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Let’s go over the rules</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>CC26.3.1 Chapter 6-4</b>: Unauthorized Wearing of the Uniform. Wearing the uniform is prohibited under of the following circumstances:</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Part B. During or connection with political activities, private employment, or commercial interest that implies sponsorship by the Corps of the activities or interest.</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">A PHS officer, in service dress blues, on television, and answering phone calls at a PBS fundraising event implies an organizational sponsorship that does not exist.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Next Time</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">If a PHS officer wants to participate in fundraising events that officer needs to leave their uniform at home. For after-hours activities, which are outside of normal PHS duties, the general rule is: Anonymity is preferred rather than public advocacy.</span></font></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?122-Please-Don’t-Wear-Your-PHS-Uniform-for-Fundraising</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Collectivism in the Industrial Park; a Health Collective as Infrastructure</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?121-Collectivism-in-the-Industrial-Park-a-Health-Collective-as-Infrastructure</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:32:51 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>I was wondering the other night what would make everybody happy who shared the nightmare of providing affordable health care to the poorest of our...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">I was wondering the other night what would make everybody happy who shared the nightmare of providing affordable health care to the poorest of our nation.  It seems that any attempt to do so is met with cries of Socialism and interference with the inner workings of capitalism.  I was also considering the bonds that are passed in many, if not all communities, and laws passed too, that set aside large areas of land, paid for by the taxpayer, with the roads and infrastructure ready to be tapped by businesses for the sake of attracting jobs and a future tax base for the community.  This also works for big stadiums built by the taxpayer for sports.  Huge expenditures that promise to bring money into an area that are borne by every man, woman and child in the economic zone.  Yet, few benefit from these magnets to industry.  In fact, the plan can backfire when a big box retailer comes in, attracted by the infrastructure and low taxes, and uses its buying power of foreign manufactured goods as a lever to undercut local mom and pop businesses.  But that's another story.  Lets not concentrate on that scenario.<br />
<br />
Instead, let's look at another way to attract business that pays dividends for everyone in the local area.  I call it Collectivism in the Industrial Park.  It goes like this: Healthcare is one of the largest expenses for businesses, small and large.  If wages are depressed here because goods are made abroad, individuals will find it hard to find affordable care either individually or through an employer.  Some politicians hate making everybody pay for health care for a few poor people; it's Socialism, they say... it undermines Capitalism.<br />
<br />
How about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism" target="_blank">Collectivism</a> that mirrors the concept of the Industrial Park?  It works like this.  The local community (or a group of communities) pass a bond that is serviced by a tax levied on everyone in that tax district.  The bond services the building, equipment, supplies and wages of local health providers, and some is set aside for scholarships to medical and dental schools.  Everyone in the community contributes to the bond, including local businesses.  Same scenario as the industrial park.  Yet, businesses can tap into the Health Collective, individuals can tap into the Health Collective.  Everybody benefits from the bond that everyone is paying into.  The Health Collective provides the level of service that is supported by the bond.  Everyone gets an entitlement to a portion of the health care services.  Businesses can use the Health Collective to lower their premiums and provide certain basic services to their employees because they can pay into servicing the bond at a different rate, based on the number of employees.  When the bond pays off the infrastructure, a new bond can support expansion, or the tax rate can be lowered to support annual costs.  Where does the working capital come from to get these projects off the ground?  If communities can get the help they need to to build an industrial park or stadium, why not a hospital or clinic?    <br />
<br />
The important part of this Health Collective is, it is <u>local</u> and everyone is allowed to benefit.  Of course, a system to support "membership" in the Health Collective would be critical to its success because its services are finite.  If state or federal governments want to step in with grants or programs that supplement the services, fine... all the better.  But the concept here is that healthcare is <i>infrastructure.  </i>It is infrastructure that doesn't benefit just a few who get the jobs at the local stadium or own parking lots and hotels and restaurants near the stadium.  It doesn't just assist venture capitalists who tap into the low tax incentive and industrial park roads, sewers and land.  It doesn't leave behind an empty or dying industrial park or mall, killed by some big box retailer or company that was lured elsewhere by a better deal.  There is always a market for health care services in good times and in bad, and these Health Collectives can be a magnet to businesses who want to provide some level of basic health services but can't do it alone.  And most importantly, the locals who are often left holding the bag for projects that benefit just a few can tap into this type of infrastructure for years to come.  Does the USPHS fit into this model?  I would certainly hope so, because working in a Health Collective is exactly the type experience and service we need to provide, at the local level with infrastructure bought and paid for by the people who need our help the most.</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?121-Collectivism-in-the-Industrial-Park-a-Health-Collective-as-Infrastructure</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[I'll Have the Simplest Argument Possible, Please]]></title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?120-I-ll-Have-the-Simplest-Argument-Possible-Please</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 01:35:24 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Anytime I read an idea or proposal on the internet these days, I'll take a quick look at the comments underneath the article.  I admit it's a bit...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">Anytime I read an idea or proposal on the internet these days, I'll take a quick look at the comments underneath the article.  I admit it's a bit like rubbernecking at the accident scene.  Amid the din are a few rare nuggets of thoughtful commentary, which are immediately swamped with a series of detractors armed with the "simplest argument":<br />
<br />
"Nobody is putting a gun to your head (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"If we let them (fill in the blanks) the next thing they'll want to do is (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"This country was founded on (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"Freedom (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"If you don't like it here you can just move to (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"I don't believe in (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"I believe in (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"Leave the (fill in the blanks) alone, they have every right to (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"Big government (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
"Small government (fill in the blanks)..."<br />
<br />
I'm sure there are many others I could list but frankly I hate wading around in all that thick, triple distilled rhetoric for more material.  It's not that I expect people who write comments underneath an article to be fair to the writer's intent or fair to each other.  <br />
<br />
The internet has given the voiceless a voice.  It's one reason why I started PHSChat, so we could all talk to each other without the organizational and geographic boundaries that kept us apart.  It's also why, when the 'Chat was founded in October 2008, it was met with a lot of cautious commentary; the thought was something like "that will surely descend into a cesspool of dissident commentary about the Corps and will drag us all down with it".  Nope.  That didn't happen.  Not even close.  Besides, this is a <u>moderated</u> forum.  The other comment was "If you say something anonymously, it doesn't count for anything".<br />
<br />
I've been nothing but proud and pleased with the support this forum has gathered here, and from our supporters on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/PHSChat-Forums-for-USPHS-Officers/50563559963" target="_blank"><b>Facebook</b></a> and <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/phschat" target="_blank"><b>LinkedIn</b></a>.  I'm proud of the thoughtfulness with which we've all talked about the Corps and Public Health, how we help each other, and respect each other, anonymously or not.  We've been frank, honest, and 99.9 % respectful.  We shine a light on what we are happy about without ignoring what we are unhappy about.  And while it seems that the rest of the internet, and many uniformed service forums, have descended into pits of crass self-interest and sniping, we have kept it professional and friendly.  I rarely have to moderate posts, and if I do, it's just to correct a few spelling errors.<br />
<br />
I think that speaks volumes.</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?120-I-ll-Have-the-Simplest-Argument-Possible-Please</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ODU's, What's all the fuss?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?119-ODU-s-What-s-all-the-fuss</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:23:54 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>*Thank you US Coast Guard:* 
Rumor has it that the US Public Health Service will be replacing the Battle Dress Uniforms (BDU’s), and changing to the...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Thank you US Coast Guard:</b></span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Rumor has it that the US Public Health Service will be replacing the Battle Dress Uniforms (BDU’s), and changing to the Operational Duty Uniform (ODU). The ODU is the current fatigue uniform of the US Coast Guard (USCG). </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">This is good news. The Public Health Service (PHS) had very few options for a new fatigue uniform. So, what’s all the fuss? </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Navy Work Uniform (NWU):</b></span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">About five years ago the Public Health Service leadership made a decision that the Commission Corps would follow the uniform standards of the Navy. This was a practical decision that, at that time, was made for very good reasons. Then something happened that was not anticipated.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">About three years ago, the Navy adopted a camouflage uniform called the Navy Work Uniform (NWU). The NWU, and its variants, have the “ACE (Anchor, USS Constitution, Eagle)” logo printed on a blue digital pattern. The “ACE” logo is an exclusive trademark of the US Navy. The “ACE” logo makes NWU unacceptable as a uniform for the PHS.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">US Coast Guard and ODU’s:</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">There’s nothing visually unique to the USCG’s ODU. This uniform is solid blue, and has a pattern similar to the BDU. The USCG’s version of the ODU has an organizational insignia embroidered on the shirt and trousers pockets. The commission officers of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officers use the same uniform without the USCG insignia. Presently, NOAA officers buy their ODU’s through the USCG Uniform Distribution Center. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Why do some PHS officers object to the ODU’s?</b></span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Replacing uniforms can be costly: The cost for one set of ODU shirt and trousers will be near $65.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The blue USCG ODU’s will be hot: The BDU’s and NWU’s are also hot in the summer.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Command Baseball Cap: The USCG service members wear an organizational ball cap with their ODU’s. There are subtle differences between the USCG Ball Cap and the PHS Command Baseball Cap. Still, there might be a blue utility cover in the PHS’s future. Also, many PHS officers still have their black garrison caps (just a thought).</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">USCG Foul Weather Parka II: The outer garment for the Coast Guard’s ODU is the Foul Weather Parka II (FWP II). The FWP II is expensive. Retail, the outer coat (alone) will cost $260. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Not military enough: The officers US Public Health Service do not require or need camouflaged uniforms. The officers of the US Public Health Service should not wear the fatigue uniforms of any branch of the Department of Defense. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Wrong color: Henry Ford said, “The customer can have a car painted any color so long as it is black”. Currently, the only color available for the ODU’s is blue.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Final thoughts about ODU’s:</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Let’s not forget, the Commissioned Corps of the US Public Health Service is an autonomous uniform service. The fatigue uniform of the PHS does not have to be a perfect copy of a military uniform. The leadership of the PHS has broad authority to develop a uniform policy that is specific to the needs of our service.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Perhaps there could be some flexibility concerning the FWP II. Many PHS officers have serviceable BDU coats and field jackets. The PHS uniform board might consider making the FWP II a non-mandatory item. Let the PHS troops who have serviceable BDU coats and jackets continue wear them with the ODU’s. This is a functional and an economic compromise that is not unreasonable.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">If the FWP II issue can’t be resolved, it might be feasible to buy blue M-65 field jackets from a commercial manufacturer. A blue M-65 field jacket would cost less than eighty dollars (Note: The trusty old M-65 field jacket can be bought in the color blue, but it is not military issue).</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Use the current PHS khaki belt for the ODU trousers. The khaki belt, with a brass buckle, will work just fine. No need to run up the costs. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Does the USCG Uniform Distribution Center have the capacity to acquire enough ODU’s for the entire Commission Corps? This could be, initially, up to forty thousand trouser and shirts in different sizes.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">If the designation “Operational Duty Uniform” is proprietary to the USCG, the term “Blue Fatigues” would be an appropriate alternative description. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Use the same patches, and name tape that is currently being used on the blue coveralls. The PHS Uniform Board might want to consider a full color &quot;1798&quot; organizational patch on the left shoulder.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Retire the ”USPHS” organizational tape that is currently worn on the blue coveralls and BDU’s. The blue fatigues should have an organizational tape that has yellow lettering and clearly states: “US Public Health Service”. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Not everyone is going to think that the ODU’s are the best option. That’s alright. No organization will ever have a complete consensus on any vital subject. If this is the final decision, and if the Commissioned Corps adopts the ODU’s, this decision should be accepted with minimal contradictions, or complaints. It’s essential to our organizational identity to move purposefully into the future as a united front.</span></font></font><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><font color="#000000">These are personal observations, and private opinions, and nothing more.</font></span></span></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?119-ODU-s-What-s-all-the-fuss</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>PHS Officer Training Part 1:  Move the Officer Basic Course</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?118-PHS-Officer-Training-Part-1-Move-the-Officer-Basic-Course</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:34:50 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>PHS Officer Training Part 1: Move the Officer Basic Course 
*The Whole Kit and Caboodle* 
Good things are happening to the United States Public...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">PHS Officer Training Part 1: Move the Officer Basic Course</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The Whole Kit and Caboodle</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Good things are happening to the United States Public Health Service.  In the past couple of years the Public Health Service (PHS) has made a great effort to increase the purposefulness of the Commission Officers Training Academy (COTA).   The Commission Officer Training Academy is the PHS’s organization that operates the Officer Basic Course (OBC).  When a new officer is called to active duty their PHS careers now start at OBC.  Without any doubt, this is an improvement, and essential for development of the corps. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"> All are in agreement that COTA is doing a fine job, but a delicate question must be asked: Is there better way to operate the Officer Basic Course?  </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">For a start, there are significant advantages if the OBC and its dedication cadre were moved out of the Washington, DC area to a more centralized location in the United States.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Deep in the heart of Texas, Clap! Clap!</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Presently, the Officer Basic Course is a two week course taught at the Holiday Inn at Gaitherburg, Maryland.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">If the PHS Officer Basic course could be moved to a more centralized location where would that be?</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">After careful consideration, the first choice for a new PHS OBC training location would be Fort Sam Houston, Texas.  Fort Sam Houston is a small, but very active, military base located on the north side of San Antonio, Texas. It is the home of the Brooks Army Medical Center, Army Medical Department and Training Center.  Fort Sam Houston could easily accommodate the PHS Officer Basic Course as a tenant.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">What are the advantages?</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Possible Lower Operating Costs:</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">(1)  The cost of leasing space from the Holiday Inn would be eliminated. Classrooms and office space would be available at the Medical Education and Training Center (also known as the school house), or at the underused old Brook Army hospital complex. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">(2)  The centralized location of San Antonio, Texas would reduce the total costs of traveling for most new officers.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">(3)  There’s an existing temporary lodging infrastructure for students, either on base, or outside the gate. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Better Results:</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Fort Sam Houston is a military base. The Commissioned Corps of United States Public Health Service is a uniform service that often acts like a military organization.  It should seem obvious that new PHS officers should be indoctrinated in a location where wearing a military uniform is normal and expected.   This is a simple but very import concept concerning organizational identity that can’t really be nurtured at a Holiday Inn.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Continuity of Government:</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">It’s unpleasant to be reminded, but the District of Columbia and its adjacent communities are potential targets of weapons of mass destruction.  It would be prudent and farsighted for the PHS to disperse its limited assets to other locations across the United States.  The Commissioned Officer Training Academy is completely portable.  If the PHS Officer Basic Course does not have to be in the vicinity of the national Capitol, perhaps, it would be wiser to move this program to another location, such as Fort Sam Houston, Texas.  </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Political:</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">By moving Officer Basic Course to central Texas the United State Public Health Service enters into a new sphere of congressional districts. There are four congressional districts that surround San Antonio.  Each district has a member of congress that might become a potential defender of our modest organization.</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Lock, Stock, and Barrel</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Why would anyone object?</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">There’s always resistance to new ideas.  It’s understandable that the existing COTA cadre would not be thrilled with the idea of moving to Texas.  That’s alright, you cannot blame them.  Nobody likes the idea of selling a house, moving a family, or buying another house.  To accommodate the existing COTA cadre, the organizational transfer to Texas could be done at a moderate pace over a couple of years.  During the transition period it might be necessary to have two locations for the Officer Basic Course, Maryland and Texas, until all the personnel are properly situated.  </span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Location, Location, Location</span></font></font></b><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">There‘s a well-developed concept concerning the training of military personnel: The more effort put into training the better the outcome.  This means that PHS officers will develop superior judgment to make critical decisions at the appropriate time under difficult circumstances.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Fort Sam Houston would be perfectly suitable for training new PHS officers.  Better training produces superior officer, superior officers become better leaders.  Better leaders will make the Corps stronger.  A stronger Corps will better serve and protect our country.</span></font></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?118-PHS-Officer-Training-Part-1-Move-the-Officer-Basic-Course</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>PHS Awards and Decorations  Part 2: Unit and Service Awards</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?117-PHS-Awards-and-Decorations-Part-2-Unit-and-Service-Awards</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:35:11 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>In the last article it was suggested that the Public Health Service (PHS) would be better served if their awards directly matched the awards of the...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">In the last article it was suggested that the Public Health Service (PHS) would be better served if their awards directly matched the awards of the military services. The previous recommendations may seem academic, but it does tidy things up. The discussion will continue on the subject of unit, and service awards of the Public Health Service.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">These are my observations, suggestions, and nothing more.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Unit Awards</span></font></font><br />
</b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">What is a unit award? Generally, it is a ribbon and not a medal. Unit awards are given to military organization when meritorious service has been performed as a result of a group effort. In the military, unit awards are associated for heroic achievement in combat. In the PHS, a unit award can be given for high standards of organizational performance under difficult circumstances.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Modestly, the PHS only uses two unit awards; &quot;<b>Outstanding Unit Award&quot;</b>, and &quot;<b>Unit Commendation Award&quot; </b>:</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Unit Commendation </b>(UC): Change the name of the “Unit Commendation” to the <i><b>“Surgeon General’s Unit Commendation”</b></i> . Frame border of the UC ribbon in gold.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Outstanding Unit Citation </b>(OUC): Change the name of the “Outstanding Unit Citation” to the<i> <b>“Health and Human Service’s Outstanding Unit Citation”</b></i> . Frame the border of the OUC ribbon in gold.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">These are little changes, but they will increase stature of the UC, and OUC, and properly delineate these ribbons as unit awards.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">At some point in the future, the PHS should create one additional unit award that is superior to OUC. This new award would be called the <b>“Presidential Unit Citation (PHS)”</b> . The Presidential Unit Citation (PHS) would be awarded for participating in extraordinary events, such as the Hurricane Katrina, or 9/11. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The US Coast Guard uses a small emblem called the “Hurricane Clasp” that is worn on their unit awards. The Coast Guard’s “Hurricane Clasp” was last awarded for the Katrina operations in 2006. The PHS might consider adopting the “Hurricane Clasp” as an accoutrement for their unit or service awards. <br />
</span></font></font><br />
<b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Service Awards</span></font></font><br />
</b><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Service medal and ribbons denote honorable service and the performance of duties within specified and limited dates in specified geographical areas. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Two well-deserved PHS service medals are the Hazardous Duty Award, and Isolated Hardship Award. Both of these medals represent committed professionalism, at times, under difficult circumstances. The intentions of these medals were well conceived, but the application is slightly unfinished. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Isolated Hardship Award (IHA): </b>The majority of the IHA’s (sometimes called the ISOHAR) are given to PHS officers who are stationed in rural Alaska, or remote Indian reservations. Currently, the IHA is a onetime only medal. An officer will only get the IHA once in their career, regardless if that officer has worked at an isolated hardship station for six months, or twenty years. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The onetime only provision for the IHA should be rescinded. The IHA should be awarded annually to PHS officers who have continued their careers at isolated hardship duty stations. Annual awards of the IHA would require formal orders, but not necessarily a replacement medal. Service stars or oak leaf clusters would indicate subsequent awards.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Hazardous Duty Award (HDA):</b> The majority of the HDA’s are given to PHS officers who are assigned to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Currently, the HDA is a onetime only medal. An officer will only get the HDA once in their career, regardless if that officer has worked at a hazardous duty station for six months, or twenty years. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The onetime only provision of the HDA should be rescinded. The HDA should be awarded annually to PHS officers who have continued their careers at hazardous duty stations. Annual awards of the HDA would require formal orders, but not necessarily a replacement medal. Service stars or oak leafs cluster would indicate the subsequent awards.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The remainder of the PHS service awards appears to be in good order with the exception of the Foreign Duty Award, and Special Assignment Award. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Foreign Duty Award (FDA): </b>This medal should be retired. The FDA doesn’t match up with any medals of any military services. Each military service does have its own distinctive ribbon to denote assignments outside the continental United States. The PHS should create a new award called the <b>&quot;PHS</b> <b>Overseas Ribbon (OSR)&quot;. </b></span></font></font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The OSR would be awarded to PHS officers who have been stationed a minimum of 12 months outside the continental United States. All PHS officers assigned overseas, including Alaska, Hawaii, or other US overseas territories would qualify for the OSR. If an officer has served in more than one overseas assignment a number device would be worn on the ribbon starting with the second award.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Special Assignment Award (SAA): </b>The SAA should be retired. There’s no military equivalence for this award. An appropriate award for a PHS officer who completes a special assignment with distinction should be an honor award, such as a PHS Achievement Medal.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Regular Corps Ribbon (RCR):</b> Originally, the RCR was given to PHS officers who were assimilated into the Regular Corps. Supposedly, all PHS commission officers are now in the Regular Corps, if this is accurate the RCR should be retained, and be awarded to all service members on the fourth anniversary of their call to active duty. <br />
</span></font></font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Civilian Awards</b>: Civilian employees of the American military are eligible for medals, and certificates. These are incentive awards for honorable service. At this time, the PHS does not have this type of recognition for civilian employees. This is a courtesy that is overdue. As mentioned in the previous article, the PHS Outstanding Service Medal, and the PHS Citation Medal would serve admirably for this purpose.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Award for Spouses</b>: When a PHS officer retires, the spouse of the retiring officer should receive some type of official recognition. A new award should be created called the <b>“Certificate of Appreciation for Spouses of Retiring Commission Corps Officers”. </b>This type of recognition has been used in the military services for some time.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Let’s sum it up: </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The PHS unit awards should be reviewed and updated.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The corps should do a little more to recognize the contributions and professionalism of its officers who serve at hazardous duty stations, isolated hardship duty stations, and those who serve outside boundaries of the continental United States. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">There are a couple PHS service awards that have outlived their usefulness. These awards should be retired.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">At some point, the PHS needs to create awards and certificates to formally recognize the contributions of hard working civilian employees, and dedicated spouses.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">In doing so, the PHS awards and decorations become more functional, and comparatively more understandable. <br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="2"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Remember, these are my opinions, suggestions, and nothing more.</span></font></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?117-PHS-Awards-and-Decorations-Part-2-Unit-and-Service-Awards</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[C'Mon, HHS...Give Us An App We Can Deploy With!]]></title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?116-C-Mon-HHS-Give-Us-An-App-We-Can-Deploy-With!</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:34:28 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Deployments have revealed one certainty (at least for me); our data collection and our status updates must be cloud-based and multi-platform.  If you...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">Deployments have revealed one certainty (at least for me); our data collection and our status updates must be cloud-based and multi-platform.  If you don't know what I mean by this, I'll break it down; we all need to leverage our personal smartphones and tablets to collect data and merge data centrally.  We need an app that we can all use!<br />
<br />
I can only describe our command-center, windows pc-based, "let's find a connection with some bandwidth" way of merging data and connecting to the outside world as cumbersome, unreliable, slow and practically useless in a field environment. <i> <b>Despite our best efforts to make it work, it never does</b></i>.<ol class="decimal"><li style="">Why cumbersome: because of firewalls and access; if we glom off of a host network at whatever facility we have at the command center, there are concerns that our connections will compromise the network.  The connections require IT officers.  Access is often limited to a few PC's (which are not connected to a cloud-based server anyway) that are controlled by command staff.  Data collected on these PC's are not distributed.  If you need application A and it's on computer B; you have to wait for your turn on computer B.  If you are working on a word document to do a status update, you just took one of the few available connections to the internet away from everyone.</li><li style="">Why unreliable: Who is to say that wherever we deploy there will be a network at the command center?  Wi-Fi and cellular connections are not guaranteed.</li><li style="">Why slow: The more PC's connected to the network, the slower it performs.</li><li style="">Why practically useless: Because of time and distance.  If you are not at the command center, you still need to collect data, merge the data centrally, and write status updates.  Waiting to do all these things at the command center, especially if you have to key-in the data, is a waste of time and a major cause for 18 and 20-hour days.</li></ol>What is the solution?<br />
<br />
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius had it only <b>partially right</b> when she started a <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/open/plan/opengovernmentplan/initiatives/initiative.html" target="_blank">Health Data Initiative</a> recently, aimed toward distributing health data via a HHS Health Data Community Dataset.  She left out one of the most important users of such a system: the "Deployment" community within DHHS.<br />
<br />
I can think of a number of ways products from Google, Apple, and Microsoft could be used, with available apps, to collect cloud-based data.  But none of these ways is comprehensive, none accomplish the mission securely enough and allow only government to "own" the data.  Getting everyone on the same app looks impossible to me without some leadership at HHS.<br />
<br />
I'll suggest the need here.  <b>We need an app that</b>:<br />
<ul><li style="">Allows a secure connection to HHS with an app that requires PIN access by the user.  That way unauthorized access to the app is minimized if the host device is lost.</li><li style="">Sends data to HHS servers that are mirrored (the databases are redundant and distributed geographically) to prevent data loss.</li><li style="">Runs on multiple platforms (iOS, Android and Windows Mobile) so anyone with a smartphone in the field can use cellular networks to upload and download data.</li><li style="">Allows the user to send status updates (text reports) to the "cloud" where command staff can edit and forward to OFRD and others.</li><li style="">Allows easy design of data collection forms that can be designed and saved in the "cloud".</li><li style="">Contains all ICS dataforms so the ICS systems can be leveraged right at the start (T-cards, Safety, Procurement, etc.).</li><li style="">Allows wireless printing at the command center.</li><li style="">Contains useful information resources for hazard assessment.</li><li style="">Contains ready-made forms for patient ID and check-in, triage, hazard assessment.</li><li style="">Allows data download to a central PC by Wi-Fi or cable when cloud-based data management is not available.</li><li style="">Allows data from forms to be sent to a cloud in a database that is set up by the user and can be shared by anyone with the form.</li><li style="">Has a permission-based system that secures databases and forms as read-only, write-only, or read-write.</li><li style="">Allows data and forms to be downloaded in commonly used .pdf and .csv formats.</li><li style="">Leverages the mapping and geotagging capabilities of smartphones.</li><li style="">Works with tablets too.  We can stop hauling around bulky laptops and start using Wi-Fi capable tablets.  If field personnel also have a 3G/4G tablet, all the better!</li><li style="">Allows us to send distributed alerts to all users in the field.</li></ul>Cost savings seem to me to be self-evident, and all of this seems in the realm of capability, right now.  Tablets and phones are cheap compared to a laptop.  They are easy to use, and come ready for wi-fi connection.  Many phones and tablets can actually double as wireless hot-spots, allowing users to set up a mini-net work anywhere they can find decent bandwidth.<br />
<br />
Here's the reality; most of us use our personal phones and laptops in a deployment anyway.  We can't get serious work done without them.  If we knew we could get reimbursed some nominal amount for using our data bandwidth through our smartphones and tablets, I'm certain we would.  I'm certain most of us wouldn't be bothered at all by contributing a tiny bit of our personal data plans to a deployment.  We would gladly contribute our communication hardware rather than use the old command-center, pc-based networks that never, ever work, and have become a major impediment to doing our job in a digital world.<br />
<br />
<b>Secretary Sebelius, Assistant Secretary Koh, Surgeon General Benjamin, our HHS IT people, can you make this app?</b></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?116-C-Mon-HHS-Give-Us-An-App-We-Can-Deploy-With!</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Public Health Commons of Pinellas County</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?115-The-Public-Health-Commons-of-Pinellas-County</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2011 03:59:50 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[When Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring)" was published in 1962, the book described the emerging effects of...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">When Rachel Carson's "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring" target="_blank">Silent Spring</a>" was published in 1962, the book described the emerging effects of pesticides that bio-accumulate in insects and biomagnify to result in the death of song birds. It was a wake up call to the chemical industry, and it's conclusions were met with much resistance. It was a fitting prelude to a Science journal article published in 1968 titled "<a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/misc/webfeat/sotp/pdfs/162-3859-1243.pdf" target="_blank">The Tragedy of the Commons</a>". The Tragedy describes the rational self-interest of any one individual to take common resources for one's gain, to the distributed detriment of the many, until self-interested individuals accelerate the commons to rapid depletion. The Commons is a reference to a shared resource that is finite in its capacity to support a given population.<br />
<br />
The reason I bring these classic environmental pieces together is the availability of information that refutes the safety and utility of what I call the "Public Health Commons". The Public Health Commons are distributed systems, typically government-run and funded, that we share as a common resource. Lets take two examples: water fluoridation and vaccinations. These have been staples of public health practice for decades. It's not that debate over fluoridation or vaccine safety shouldn't exist, it should. But the debates should be addressed by public health officials whose education and training influence their decisions.<br />
<br />
The other dimension to the Public Health Commons is "government-run and funded". As they say, all politics are local. As the people of Pinellas County, Florida found out when the Public Health Commons was dealt a blow by four of seven county commissioners who voted to discontinue fluoridation.<br />
<br />
This is where Silent Spring and the Tragedy of the Commons link. From The Tragedy; "Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons. Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all" and "The individual benefits as an individual from his ability to deny the truth even though society as a whole, of which he is a part, suffers".<br />
<br />
The commissioners who discontinued fluoridation were not presented with compelling scientific evidence that fluoridation is a significant public health risk.  Even if they were, did they then consult with the scientists at CDC who endorse the practice? Did they work with the EPA to determine if Pinellas County had set its fluoride concentration to recommended limits?  In an action I equate to the Tragedy of the Commons, the four commissioners were convinced that they alone had the perspective necessary to affix a tag to The Public Health Commons.  The tag reads "DANGER - Big Government, Less Freedom, Socialism At Work".<br />
<br />
Shutting down programs because of the distributed benefit is bad enough.  To hide behind this agenda, they can cite studies and quote experts that provide them with political cover. This has been done before, to state with certainty that vaccines are dangerous, fluoridation is linked to disease, thus the risk outweighs the benefit.  Scientists know there is a difference between a rigorous study, designed with statistical power and an opinion piece or speculation.  Some decisions are harder than others as the evidence is not always clear.  But it is irresponsible as an elected official to quote a study or two, quote an opposing view, mix in a little government oppression, add a pinch of loss of freedom, a drop of paranoia, generalize for 5 minutes and half-bake for an hour before you are ready to influence the Public Health Commons, right there from your County Commissioner's seat, and affect the health of thousands.  It's not your job to ignore the public health professionals at CDC and EPA, because they just don't share your "rational self-interest".<br />
<br />
Until Silent Spring was pubished, few were paying attention to the bio-accumulation of pesticides. It took the deaths of birds to see the cause and effect. It took an observant scientist to ring the alarm. Fortunately, big government stepped in and began to regulate DDT. Now, states require pesticide applicators to be licensed and certain pesticides, including DDT, have been banned. The EPA is involved in regulating the pesticide industry; the CDC really does know a thing or two about toxicology and public health practice.  But if your not going to listen to them about fluoridation, I'm not sure DDT and a Silent Spring couldn't make a comeback.  Is the Public Health Commons awaiting its depletion?<br />
<br />
When a population as large as that affected by this decision can lose ground in the Public Health Commons so easily, this Pinellas County decision should serve as a wake-up call to public health officials that your hard work, your education, and your training mean nothing to those who have a "rational self-interest" in ignoring your expertise.  Don't stand for it.  Present your case to the public loudly and clearly; enable them to take back their lost piece of the Public Health Commons.</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?115-The-Public-Health-Commons-of-Pinellas-County</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>USPHS History Blog</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?114-USPHS-History-Blog</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Oct 2011 03:46:25 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Wondering if other officers would be interested in researching the local history of PHS close to their duty stations and writing it in their Blog.  I...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">Wondering if other officers would be interested in researching the local history of PHS close to their duty stations and writing it in their Blog.  I have run across several sites of historical significance in my travels around the Pacific Northwest and would love to blog some of the things I have learned.  There is the Quarantine Station at Knappton Cove at the mouth of the Columbia River, the Merchant Marine Hospital here in Seattle, and it's prior location on Port Townsend, WA (the building no longer exists).  This would require quite a bit of research and formulation of facts into a well written narrative, so I would only start if I knew that it would actually be of some interest to others and that others would be willing to do some research in their own area and share it here.  Who knows, with enough collaboration we may get enough substance to compile into some sort of national compendium of PHS history.  That's a pretty lofty goal, I know, but a journey always starts with one step.</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>Irishwolf</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?114-USPHS-History-Blog</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Improvements in communication from Agencies/Senior Officers</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?113-Improvements-in-communication-from-Agencies-Senior-Officers</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Sep 2011 20:22:04 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Slowly, but unmistakably, I have noticed some improvements in clarifying/disseminating information to the rank in file.  Two recent examples come to...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">Slowly, but unmistakably, I have noticed some improvements in clarifying/disseminating information to the rank in file.  Two recent examples come to mind:  the promotions policy and awards.  Over the past several weeks, there has been a concerted effort from the promotions coordinator to explain and clarify the process.  I have participated in two conference calls on this:  one organized by the local COA and the other from the DOD liason staff.  At one of the conference calls, a flag officer led the first part of the meeting.  Similarly, there have been clarifications on the awards process and which awards are authorized.  There was a (limited) opportunity for Q&amp;A in both presentations; while the answers provided were sometimes vague or deferred (i.e. OSG is currently working on this policy and we will let you know about any changes as soon as they come; the management re-organization and PPA has delayed action, etc), the fact that senior officers are taking questions is encouraging in itself.I hope this is part of a trend that will continue/improve going forward.  Transparency and dialogue have been shown to improve morale and confidence in an organization time and time again and a motivated and satisfied force benefits everyone.  Many questions remain and, as Chat stated in his blog comments, there is still too much misinformation out there, sometimes relayed by senior officers who don't always get the most up-to-date information (or choose not to share it).  I continue to believe that an &quot;open meeting&quot;/pep talk via teleconference or videoconference with the SG, Deputy SG and Chief of Staff would go a LONG way to dispel lingering rumors or myths about the future of the corps.  In the mean time, it seems that someone has gotten the message that officers want and need unfiltered information from Senior leadership.</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>interestedinmaine</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?113-Improvements-in-communication-from-Agencies-Senior-Officers</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>PCS Process</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?112-PCS-Process</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Sep 2011 02:37:11 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>How difficult is it for officers to PCS?  I hear that PHS officers are required to secure their own positions; I rarely see positions that cover PCS...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">How difficult is it for officers to PCS?  I hear that PHS officers are required to secure their own positions; I rarely see positions that cover PCS costs on USAJOBS.  What happens when officers cannot find positions that pay PCS costs?  I also heard that officers cannot pay for their own relocation costs...</blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>InterestedOfficer</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?112-PCS-Process</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Breaking News!  Officers Have No Rights!</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?111-Breaking-News!-Officers-Have-No-Rights!</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 02:44:21 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm kidding of course but from some comments from a couple of officers on LinkedIn regarding our petition to try to get Dr. Richard Carmona, our 17th...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore">I'm kidding of course but from some comments from a couple of officers on LinkedIn regarding our petition to try to get Dr. Richard Carmona, our 17th Surgeon General, to run for office, you'd think that putting on a uniform subjected you to some kind Orwellian mind control from the time you were commissioned until your career ended.<br />
<br />
Sadly, some officers are walking around thinking they have no rights to even talk about anything having to do with public office, or public officials, or politics. This issue has been around for decades, and guidance on these matters is not hard to find. The only question I have is... do we fall under the Hatch Act or not? Apparently, we had policy that cited the Hatch Act at one time, but that policy does not appear to be in effect any longer; CC23--Staffing, Subchapter <a href="http://dcp.psc.gov/eccis/documents/ccpm23_5_8.pdf" target="_blank">CC23.5.8</a> which states " The officer shall not engage in any political activities prohibited to Federal employees under 5 U.S.C. 7321 et seq. (the former Hatch Political Activity Act). Later, the policy mentions 5 U.S.C. 7324 too. That's not a whole lot to really sink your teeth into, and it's wrong anyway.<br />
<br />
So, let's say for the sake of argument that the Hatch Act doesn't apply for two reasons: 1) our policy is no longer in effect, and 2) we are a uniformed service, therefore the Hatch Act does not apply to us as Federal Employees. You can find that we are not defined as Employees under the Hatch Act under 5 CFR 734.101: Employee means any individual (other than the President, Vice President, <b><i>or a member of the uniformed services</i></b>) ...<br />
<br />
Ok, so now we basically have no policy on political activity of our own that applies to us as uniformed service members. So, let's do what we do and borrow something. Let's borrow Department of Defense Directive <a href="http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/134410p.pdf" target="_blank">1344.10</a>. <br />
<b><br />
Its says, that there are many things an Armed Service member CAN do:</b><br />
<br />
4.1. General<br />
4.1.1. A member of the Armed Forces on <b>active duty</b> may: <br />
4.1.1.1. Register, vote, and express a personal opinion on political candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces.<br />
4.1.1.2. Promote and encourage others to exercise their voting franchise, if such promotion does not constitute use of their official authority or influence to interfere with the outcome of any election.<br />
4.1.1.3. Join a partisan or nonpartisan political club and attend its meetings when not in uniform, subject to the restrictions of subparagraph 4.1.2.4. (See DoD Instruction 1334.1 (Reference (c).)<br />
4.1.1.4. Serve as an election official, if such service is not as a representative of a partisan political party, does not interfere with the performance of military duties, is performed when not in uniform, and the Secretary concerned has given prior approval. The Secretary concerned may NOT delegate the authority to grant or deny such permission.<br />
4.1.1.5. Sign a petition for a specific legislative action or a petition to place a candidate’s name on an official election ballot, if the signing does not obligate the member to engage in partisan political activity and is done as a private citizen and not as a representative of the Armed Forces.<br />
4.1.1.6. Write a letter to the editor of a newspaper expressing the member’s personal views on public issues or political candidates, if such action is not part of an organized letter writing campaign or a solicitation of votes for or against a political party or partisan political cause or candidate. If the letter identifies the member as on active duty (or if the member is otherwise reasonably identifiable as a member of the Armed Forces), the letter should clearly state that the views expressed are those of the individual only and not those of the Department of Defense (or Department of Homeland Security for members of the Coast Guard).<br />
4.1.1.7. Make monetary contributions to a political organization, party, or committee favoring a particular candidate or slate of candidates, subject to the limitations under section 441a of title 2, United States Code (U.S.C.) (Reference (d)); section 607 of title 18, U.S.C. (Reference (e)); and other applicable law. <br />
4.1.1.8. Display a political bumper sticker on the member’s private vehicle. <br />
4.1.1.9. Attend partisan and nonpartisan political fundraising activities, meetings, rallies, debates, conventions, or activities as a spectator when not in uniform and when no inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement can reasonably be drawn. <br />
4.1.1.10. Participate fully in the Federal Voting Assistance Program.<br />
<br />
<b>Its says, that there are many things an Armed Service member can NOT do:</b><br />
<br />
4.1.2. A member of the Armed Forces on <b>active duty</b> shall not: <br />
4.1.2.1. Participate in partisan political fundraising activities (except as permitted in subparagraph 4.1.1.7.), rallies, conventions (including making speeches in the course thereof), management of campaigns, or debates, either on one’s own behalf or on that of another, without respect to uniform or inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement. Participation includes more than mere attendance as a spectator. (See subparagraph 4.1.1.9.) <br />
4.1.2.2. Use official authority or influence to interfere with an election, affect the course or outcome of an election, solicit votes for a particular candidate or issue, or require or solicit political contributions from others. <br />
4.1.2.3. Allow or cause to be published partisan political articles, letters, or endorsements signed or written by the member that solicits votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. This is distinguished from a letter to the editor as permitted under the conditions noted in subparagraph 4.1.1.6. <br />
4.1.2.4. Serve in any official capacity with or be listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club. <br />
4.1.2.5. Speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. <br />
4.1.2.6. Participate in any radio, television, or other program or group discussion as an advocate for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. <br />
4.1.2.7. Conduct a political opinion survey under the auspices of a partisan political club or group or distribute partisan political literature.<br />
4.1.2.8. Perform clerical or other duties for a partisan political committee or candidate during a campaign, on an election day, or after an election day during the process of closing out a campaign.<br />
4.1.2.9. Solicit or otherwise engage in fundraising activities in Federal offices or facilities, including military reservations, for any political cause or candidate. <br />
4.1.2.10. March or ride in a partisan political parade. <br />
4.1.2.11. Display a large political sign, banner, or poster (as distinguished from a bumper sticker) on a private vehicle. <br />
4.1.2.12. Display a partisan political sign, poster, banner, or similar device visible to the public at one’s residence on a military installation, even if that residence is part of a privatized housing development. <br />
4.1.2.13. Participate in any organized effort to provide voters with transportation to the polls if the effort is organized by or associated with a partisan political party, cause, or <br />
candidate. <br />
4.1.2.14. Sell tickets for or otherwise actively promote partisan political dinners and similar fundraising events. <br />
4.1.2.15. Attend partisan political events as an official representative of the Armed Forces, except as a member of a joint Armed Forces color guard at the opening ceremonies of the national conventions of the Republican, Democratic, or other political parties recognized by the Federal Elections Committee or as otherwise authorized by the Secretary concerned. <br />
4.1.2.16. Make a campaign contribution to, or receive or solicit (on one’s own behalf) a campaign contribution from, any other member of the Armed Forces on active duty. Any contributions not prohibited by this subparagraph remain subject to the gift provisions of sections 2635.301-2635.304 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (Reference (f)). See subparagraph 4.1.2.1. for general prohibitions on partisan fundraising activity.<br />
<br />
4.1.3. Commissioned officers shall not use contemptuous words as prohibited by section 888 of Reference (b) or participate in activities proscribed by DoD Directives 5200.2 and 1325.6 <br />
(References (g) and (h), respectively).<br />
4.1.4. Subject to any other restrictions in law, a member of the Armed Forces not on active duty may take the actions or participate in the activities permitted in subparagraph 4.1.1., and may take the actions and participate in the activities prohibited in subparagraph 4.1.2, provided the member is not in uniform and does not otherwise act in a manner that could reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement<br />
4.1.5. Activities not expressly prohibited may be contrary to the spirit and intent of this Directive. Any activity that may be reasonably viewed as directly or indirectly associating the Department of Defense or the Department of Homeland Security (in the case of the Coast Guard) or any component of these Departments with a partisan political activity or is otherwise contrary to the spirit and intention of this Directive shall be avoided<br />
<font color="#0000cd"><br />
</font><font color="#000080"><b>As a USPHS Officer, you have a choice to follow a defunct CC that doesn't look like it applies anyway because the Hatch Act doesn't apply to uniformed services, or you can follow the DoD Directive, which doesn't apply to USPHS Officers either. Common sense dictates that you should use the DoD Directive "Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces" as a guide.</b></font><div style="margin-left:40px"><br />
<br />
<hr />The old Hatch Act Statutes quoted in CC23.5.8:<br />
<br />
<font size="1">§ 7321. POLITICAL PARTICIPATION</font><br />
<font size="1">It is the policy of the Congress that employees should be encouraged to exercise fully, freely, and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and to the extent not expressly prohibited by law, their right to participate or to refrain from participating in the political processes of the Nation.<br />
<br />
</font><font size="1">§ 7324. POLITICAL ACTIVITIES ON DUTY; PROHIBITION</font><font size="1"><br />
</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(a)</b> An employee may not engage in political activity—</font><font size="1"><b>(1)</b> while the employee is on duty;</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(2)</b> in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an individual employed or holding office in the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof;</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(3)</b> while wearing a uniform or official insignia identifying the office or position of the employee; or</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(4)</b> using any vehicle owned or leased by the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof.</font><br />
<br />
<br />
<font size="1"><b>(b)</b></font><font size="1"><b>(1)</b> An employee described in paragraph (2) of this subsection may engage in political activity otherwise prohibited by subsection (a) if the costs associated with that political activity are not paid for by money derived from the Treasury of the United States.</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(2)</b> Paragraph (1) applies to an employee—</font><font size="1"><b>(A)</b> the duties and responsibilities of whose position continue outside normal duty hours and while away from the normal duty post; and</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(B)</b> who is—</font><font size="1"><b>(i)</b> an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President; or</font><br />
<font size="1"><b>(ii)</b> an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws</font><br />
<br />
<hr />This is Memo "<a href="http://dcp.psc.gov/PDF_docs/Standards_May2004.pdf" target="_blank">Standards of Conduct</a>" dated May 14, 2004, signed by CAPT Larry Furman describes under the heading "Political Activities" a few do's and don't but doesn't cite any legal basis for the content.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
</div></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?111-Breaking-News!-Officers-Have-No-Rights!</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Lesson From 9-11-01</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?110-A-Lesson-From-9-11-01</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:35 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>That one day has triggered so many events in our lives, and so many people have perished because of it.  Like many of you, I remember 9/11 as more...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font color="#222222">That one day has triggered so many events in our lives, and so many people have perished because of it.  Like many of you, I remember 9/11 as more than a date ten years ago when evil reigned for a day, it was also a day that turned into a deployment.<br />
<br />
Everywhere I turned in NYC, my eyes met the faces of people who died, posted memorials with a message underneath that simply said "Missing" with a phone number to call.  It was my first real exposure to the personal impact of what had happened to thousands.  Not a single poster even hinted that the person might be dead.<br />
<br />
The smoking, smoldering, acrid pile held another story, another reality.  The remains of the structures hung in the air, dust and papers were everywhere, and I knew that those faces were among me as I walked the perimeter of the pile.<br />
<br />
We were all stoic, and stunned, and very busy going about our work.  I now look back and realize what was done, and what wasn't done, and why, in the name of public health.  It was my first exposure to why Fitzhugh Mullan decided to title his 1989 book "Plagues and <b>Politics</b>: The Story of the United States Public Health Servic<span style="font-family: arial"><font size="2">e".  <br />
<br />
I emphasize the word politics because we all know how to do our jobs.  What you don't anticipate is the other dimension to your work that is inescapably, and entirely, political.<br />
<br />
You have a political fight on your hands the minute you get orders to deploy.  Never forget that what we do isn't just about doing the right thing.  <i>It's about getting everyone on board so you can do the right thing</i>.  The fight materializes; will the money, the political will, and the need mesh.  It may be slow coming.  Time is not your friend.  Bring the fight to them.  Bring it early and don't listen when told to wait.<br />
<br />
In this day of strained state and federal budgets, lets imagine another 9/11 happens tomorrow.  Are you ready for a fight?  Are you ready to test your agency heads, are they ready to back up their people?  Are you Officers ready and willing to make some noise?<br />
<br />
If you think your deployment isn't about politics, take my advice and <b>stay home</b>.  For those of you who deploy; your job is to lay it on the line early and often, and make sure everyone knows what you see with your professional judgment.  If you get a whiff of stonewalling, stand up.  If the system isn't working, stand up.<br />
<br />
Deployments don't give you a second chance.  Be taller, louder, and repeat your story in multiple directions until either someone with political power listens or tells you no.  Don't take a verbal no either; get it on the record.  <br />
<br />
Don't sit at your desk ten years later, giving a lesson learned from 9-11.</font></span></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>PHSChat</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?110-A-Lesson-From-9-11-01</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>PHS Awards and Decorations Part 1: Honor Awards</title>
			<link>http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?109-PHS-Awards-and-Decorations-Part-1-Honor-Awards</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 18:52:30 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>I really spend too much time thinking about this stuff. These are my observations, suggestions, and nothing more. 
 
The medals and ribbons of the...</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote class="blogcontent restore"><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">I really spend too much time thinking about this stuff. These are my observations, suggestions, and nothing more.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The medals and ribbons of the Public Health Service fall into three different categories: Honor, Service, or Unit.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">The Public Health Service has seven different medals that are considered Honor Awards; Distinguished Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, Surgeon General’s Exemplary Service Medal and Medallion, Outstanding Service Medal, Commendation Medal, Achievement Medal, and Citation Medal. Each of these seven medals differs in order of precedence. The PHS Distinguished Service Medal being first in precedence, while the PHS Citation Medal would be ranked a distant seventh.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Whenever practical, the Commission Corps should mirror itself with the custom and standards of the US military. The various branches of the US military only use five (<b>5</b>)medals that parallel the seven (<b>7</b>) existing PHS medals. These five US military medals, in order of precedence, include; the Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit, Meritorious Service Medal, Commendation Medal, and the Achievement Medal. The honor awards of the US military are standardized. For example, if a soldier was awarded a Meritorious Service Medal, a friend in the Navy would understand exactly the significance of this award.<br />
</span></font></font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">In order to bring the PHS Honor Awards in closer alignment with the awards military services the following suggestions have been made:<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Distinguished Service Medal (DSM): </b>The DSM is the PHS’s highest award and requires no changes. The PHS DSM directly corresponds with the DSM’s of the military services. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">At the second and third tiers of the PHS honor awards there are deviations from the US military. The next medal directly subordinate to the military DSM is the Legion of Merit (LM). The LM is awarded for exceptional duty and performance. The military only has one type of LM used by each military service. The PHS has (kind of, sort of) the equivalence of the LM but it is sequentially third in the order of precedence; Surgeon General’s Medallion, and Surgeon General’s Exemplary Service Medal.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Surgeon General’s Medallion, and Surgeon General Exemplary Service Medal: </b>These are actually two different awards. Due to the stature and dignity of the Office of the Surgeon General, both awards should be moved to the second position in the PHS order of precedence. </span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">In the proposed restructuring, the Surgeon General’s awards would have two distinct and separate divisions. </span></font></font><font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><br />
<br />
<b>Surgeon General’s Medallion (SGM):</b> The SGM would be developed to become a national award for civilians who have contributed to broad spectrum of the public health in the United States. The nominations for the SGM would be the responsibility of the regional Health and Human Services offices, and the Office of the Surgeon General would be the final approving authority.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>Surgeon General’s Exemplary Service Medal (SGESM):</b> The criteria for the SGESM would be clearly defined, and awarded to senior uniformed service members who have made significant contributions to the public health of the United States, and, or for exceptional duty and performance to the Commission Corps. For example, the SGESM would be an appropriate award for most retiring officers. This proposal would bring the SGESM to an equivalent levels as the military Legion of Merit. The approval authority for the SGESM would be the PHS Chief of Staff. The PHS Chief of Staff would chair a subcommittee of the Commissioned Corps Awards Board to ensure the SGESM is equitably distributed to deserving officers. <br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Meritorious Service Medal (MSM):</b> The PHS MSM should be moved from second to the third position in the order of precedence. This change would make the PHS MSM equivalent to the military MSM.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Outstanding Service Medal (OSM):</b> The OSM should be retired from the commission corps. There is no US military equivalence for the OSM. A better use of the OSM would be to reclassify this award for civilian employees of the PHS.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Commendation Medal (CM):</b> The CM requires no changes. PHS Commendation medal directly corresponds with the CM’s of the military services. Approval authority of this award should be expanded to the Chief Professional Officers.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Achievement Medal (AM):</b> The AM requires no changes. The PHS Achievement Medal directly corresponds with the AM’s of the military services. The approval authority for the AM would be expanded to include the Chief Professional Officers.<br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri"><b>PHS Citation (CIT):</b> The CIT should be retired from the Commission Corps. There is no US military equivalence for the CIT. A better use of the CIT would be to reclassify this award for civilian employees of the PHS.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">A new award should be created, to replace the PHS Citation, called the<b> “PHS Certificate of Achievement”. </b>An appropriate certificate, by itself, would be created for this award. The approval authority of the PHS Certificate of Achievement would include the Chief Professional Officers. <br />
</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Let’s sum it up: <br />
Retire the PHS CIT and PHS OSM, these awards are redundant.</span></font></font><br />
<font size="3"><font color="#000000"><span style="font-family: Calibri">Increase the stature and dignity of the Office of the Surgeon General, by reorganizing the criteria for the SGM, and SGESM. Make the SGESM second in the PHS order of precedence. The Surgeon General’s medal, and medallion would have two distinct classes; the medallion would be for civilians, the medal for service members.</span></font></font></blockquote>

]]></content:encoded>
			<dc:creator>David Zimbrick</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.phschat.com/forums/entry.php?109-PHS-Awards-and-Decorations-Part-1-Honor-Awards</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

