deliverables: ( 1) the interpretation of public health legal authority in regards
to a particular issue (PHALSPI), ( 2) the identification of policy and legal
strategies in response to a particular issue or situation (LADIPLS), ( 3) analysis of the legality of a specific action (LASPAC), ( 4) review of materials
(LAREV), and ( 5) legal analysis regarding requirements when completing a
particular public health process or procedure (LAREQPROC). Material review specifically included the review of potential or proposed regulations
or ordinances, the review of potential or proposed state legislation, the review of reports, the review of draft inter-agency agreements or memorandums of understanding, the review of agency guidelines and the review of
public information materials.
Several deliverables were common in requests submitted by entities of
all jurisdictions, including: ( 1) the identification of policy and legal strategies related to a particular issue (LAIDPLS), ( 2) information on policy
strategies and/or the status of policy efforts in other states or localities
(OSL), and ( 3) the provision of examples, models, templates and/or checklists (MRPCTEM). Most deliverables classified as the provision of examples, models, templates and/or checklists (MRPCTEM) fell into a few categories—including a large portion of requests for examples or models of
laws and regulations, a significant number of requests for examples or templates of policy and procedure documents, and a significant number of requests for examples or models of inter-agency agreements and memorandums of understanding.
Though this is not a scientific survey of the legal concerns facing federal,
state and local public health entities, it is a unique opportunity to observe
trends in the legal technical assistance requests made by governmental enti-
ties to the Network for Public Health Law over the course of three years.
These requests comprise the largest collection of modern practice-based da-
ta on public health legal issues from governmental entities at all levels of
22 These trends represent experiential knowledge that is im-
portant to the development of public health legal preparedness and can help
inform our understanding of the everyday practice of public health law and
the legal issues attorneys, practitioners and officials are facing at the various
jurisdictional levels of public health law practice.
The individuals seeking assistance through the Network self-selected by
submitting their requests. They likely have had some interaction with the
22. James G. Hodge et al., Major Trends in Public Health Law and Practice: A Network National Report, 41 J.L. MED. & ETHICS 737, 738 (2013).
23. Jennifer A. Bernstein, Beyond Public Health Emergency Legal Preparedness: Rethinking Best Practices, 41 J.L. MED. & ETHICS