Epidemiologic Profile

Epidemiologic Profile Assignment

Youth risk behavioral survey
Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program data
CDC Wonder (multiple data sources)
County health rankings data (multiple data sources)
Alcohol-related disease impact data
Demographic health survey data (international)
Global school-based student health survey (international)
Local evaluation reports from the department/ministry of health or other nonprofit
Interpretation of Results Regarding Key Health Issue
Size and magnitude of the measures
Trends and comparisons
Economic costs
Discussion of Problems and Strategies
Discuss disparities, limitations, and gaps in the information available regarding the health
Describe potential public health strategies to address these gaps.
Use graphs and tables where appropriate.

Epidemiologic Profile Assignment

Executive Summary
Indeed, epidemiology deals with the determination of how different disorders occur
within a population through the assessment of the risk factors and the identification of distinct
protective interventions. Most fundamentally, epidemiological evidence focuses on the

exemplification of the fact that a specific risk factor correlates or is associated with a higher
incidence of a particular disease in the population exposed to it. As such, epidemiological
profiling involves the establishment and quantification of the relationship between various risk
factors and illnesses within a community or society. However, the achievement of this objective
necessitates the establishment of whether or not there is exists excessive amounts of a particular
disease occurring in a specific geographic area. Therefore, the purpose of this epidemiologic
profiling assignment entails the provision of a summary indicating the significant public health
issues facing the selected community. It will further facilitate the identification of the
coordinated activities and policies from various agencies and organizations that focus on the
improvement of health.
More precisely, the epidemiologic profile of this community will play an integral role in
the identification of the various areas in public health that need improvement through stringent
measures and interventions aimed at safeguarding the welfare of the people. Similarly, the
attainment of this objective will involve the creation of awareness and educating the people, as
well as, the relevant stakeholders on the different ways of improving their health.


The selected community and population I chose to discuss and epidemiologically profile
in this paper entails Longfellow in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The name Longfellow emanated
from a renowned poet, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, who is credited for bringing the
community in the limelight at a time when the immigrants living in the congested neighborhoods

to the east and south of Downtown Minneapolis started moving to Longfellow. However, the
movement/migration was primarily characterized by the strategic layout of streetcar lines
connecting downtown Minneapolis to Richfield and the southern suburbs in the early part of the
twentieth century. Since then, Longfellow became home to first establishments such as the
Danish American Center, Christ Church, Minnehaha Academy, and the Longfellow House.
These establishments marked a significant bungalow style craftsman homes built in the 1920s
(James, 2019).
Located south of Minneapolis, the Longfellow community sits between the Light Rail
and the Mississippi River, and neighbors other regions such as Cooper, Seward, Hiawatha, and
Howe. More specifically, the Longfellow neighborhood is approximately a square mile between
Hiawatha Avenue and 38th Avenue, as well as 27th Street and 34th Street (James, 2019).
Historically, Longfellow was initially occupied by Dakota Sioux before the arrival of the French
explorers in 1680. However, the residents later acquired the land to the south of Franklin Avenue
between 1881 and 1883 while the remaining portions were annexed in 1887 from the Richfield
region. Seemingly, the founding cultural groups in Longfellow included bikers and jokers
abound who spent most of their time riding adjacent to the Mississippi River and along the
Hiawatha LRT trail (Niche, 2017). They comprised of families living in detached homes and
who referred to the neighborhood as a community.
Demographically, Longfellow comprises of a diverse population primarily dominated by
white Americans at 62%, followed by African Americans at 16%, Hispanics at 14%, two or more
races accounting for 5%, and Asian Americans (Pacific Islanders) at 2%. Most fundamentally,
the government and community leadership of Longfellow entails thirteen wards with a
population of approximately 30,000 residents in each neighborhood. It is a stronghold for the

Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL). Moreover, the boundaries subdividing each
ward are redrawn and established at least once every ten years following the federal census to
ensure that the population remains evenly apportioned and adheres to the equitable community
representation. Nonetheless, the Longfellow community extends across ward 12 in the southern
part of Minneapolis, and the government leaders within the region include City County officials
(the current ward representative- Andrew Johnson) who work under the mayor based in
Minneapolis (Jacob Frey). These government officials work collaboratively with the Longfellow
Community Council and other committee departments in projects such as the Neighborhood
Revitalization Program (NRP).
Moreover, based on socio-economic status, the total number of employed individuals, as
per 2015, was 2,507 with age ranges that differ significantly. For instance, individuals aged 29
years and younger were 532 (21.2%), 30 to 54 years were 1, 457 (58.1%), and 55 years and older
accounted for 518 (20.7%). Seemingly, public health maintenance in Longfellow is the
responsibility of the Minnesota Department of health, which focuses on the coordination of
health data efforts at the state and local level. It further delves into the provision of technical
assistance and consultation with various partners. Similarly, the Minnesota Center for Health
Statistics (MCHS), through its website, provides sufficient information regarding the different
health surveys conducted and subsequently links the data to a myriad of statistical resources and
publications. The provision of these services occurs through the collaboration with healthcare
facilities and organizations such as Hennepin County Public Health, Minneapolis Health
Department, MN Council for HIV/AIDS Care and Prevention Department, and Behavioral
Health and Therapy in Minneapolis, among others (McCullough, Eisen-Cohen, & Salas, 2016).
These are coupled with health care organizations such as the People’s Center Clinics and

Services which provide necessary care to the diverse community in Longfellow, Cedar-
Riverside, and Powderhorn.
Description of Available Data
According to McCullough, Eisen-Cohen, & Salas (2016), the functions of public health
play an integral role in the assessment of the welfare of a community. The accomplishment of
these core functions occurs through the collaborative efforts of health departments and distinct
partners from the public health system. On the one hand, for the health departments within a
community to attain accreditation, it is mandatory for them to complete a community health
assessment (CHA) and a community health improvement plan (CHIP). These measures describe
the community health improvement processes carried out every five years. Most fundamentally,
the majority of the local health departments (LHDs) within a community have completed a CHA
while a significant proportion (56%) of such organizations has fulfilled the CHIP requirements.
However, studies have indicated that although CHAs were a fairly ubiquitous activity for LHDs,
based on the statutory requirements, the production of a written CHIP was less common (21%).
These occurrences were based on reports indicating a low or moderate capacity for implementing
strategies from CHA.
Similarly, numerous studies have pointed out that CHAs and CHIPs facilitate the
promotion of a virtuous cycle of identification, analysis, and the prioritization of community
needs, thereby culminating in the implementation of shared goals aimed at improving the health
of a community. However, invariably, CHIPs represent a partnership between different
organizations, which implies that health departments are required to prepare adequately for the
engagement of a robust network of community partner organizations. One of the common ways

through which LHDs work with other community organizations entails the formation of a
partnership to complete a CHA or CHIP. Most fundamentally, evidence obtained from different
regions has shown that the engagement of community partners is a vital component in health
assessment as it ensures the success of the planning process. Therefore, conducting a CHA is
associated with benefits such as new or strengthened relationships between health departments
and partner organizations.
Nevertheless, McCullough, Eisen-Cohen & Salas (2016), postulate that although there
are numerous resources on how LHDs can plan and implement a CHIP, there is inadequate
evidence indicating the various ways of leveraging and expanding partnerships. As such, the
authors note that the common challenge related to community health improvement processes
entails the lack of application of the typical program evaluation metrics that include changes in
health behaviors, outcomes, and status. The main objective behind the CHIPs operations entails
the collaboration between health departments and community partners, which, in turn, facilitates
the coordination and targeting of resources effectively. In most cases, the ultimate goals of these
collaborative efforts are improved population health, but the scarcity of data regarding the causal
nature of the relationship between partners and enhanced health behaviors hinders the attainment
of such objectives through limiting the acquisition of pertinent information.
In light of the factors highlighted herein, the authors thus conducted a study aimed at
identifying the characteristics of the network involved in the implementation of the CHIP within
a community. The primary objectives in the study entailed the determination of the essential
network partners and the identification of the various gaps, gauging the current levels of partner
involvement, and understanding and effectively leveraging network resources. These were
coupled with enabling a data-driven approach that would improve the future collaborative

network. Most fundamentally, the achievement of these objectives necessitated the collection of
primary data through surveys conducted among 41 organizations involved in the Health
Improvement Partnership of Maricopa County, Arizona. Similarly, the provision of the relevant
information regarding the existence of ties with other coalition members involved the use of
previously validated Program in the Analysis, Recording, and Tracking Networks in the
Enhancement of Relationships (PARTNER). Subsequently, the study focused on the inclusion of
a depth of partnerships under eight categories of perceived value or trust in each of the current
partner organization.
Resultantly, the authors determined that the overall network in the coalition had a density
score of 30% while the degree of centralization accounted for 73% and a trust score of 81%.
Similarly, network maps used facilitated the identification of existing relationships between
HIPMC members by factors such as the duration of involvement in the coalition, the intensity,
and frequency of the partnerships, and self-reported contributions. Seemingly, the study revealed
a positive correlation between the number of ties identified and the partnership measures used
with the perceived value and trustworthiness in an organization as rated by other coalition
Although the study highlighted above was conducted in a different region or community,
it plays a significant role in providing the guidelines necessary for assessing community health
through the evaluation of the partnerships as well as collaborations between health organizations
and other relevant stakeholders. As mentioned earlier, epidemiologic profiling necessitates the
determination of the various risks factors that can lead to the occurrence and prevalence of
diseases within a community. The achievement of this objective, therefore, occurs through the
use of information provided by different health organizations, facts, and findings obtained by

distinct researchers, and the involvement of relevant stakeholders. Similarly, in the
epidemiologic profiling of Longfellow, Minnesota, the acquisition of pertinent information
necessitated the prioritization on determining the relationship between the health care
organizations within the community and the various partners and other stakeholders.
The determination of these correlations revealed a significant partnership between
government entities such as the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota One Health
Antibiotic Stewardship Collaborative initiative. Similarly, the Department of Health, in
collaboration with the center for disease control and Prevention (CDC), provided statistical
information regarding the health disparities and other relevant issues facing the people of
Minnesota. For instance, with regards to the birth rates in Longfellow, the CDC pointed out that
in 2014, the proportion of children born by unmarried mothers was 32.3% as compared to 40.2%
rate across the nation. These were followed closely by cesarean deliveries reported in that year at
26.5% as compared to 32.2% across the state, preterm births at 8.7%, and teen births at 15.5%.
According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2016), the number of live
births slightly decreased from 12.7% to 12.6% in the subsequent year.
Similarly, the CDC revealed that the rates of morbidity associated with illnesses such as
cancer, heart diseases, accidents, and chronic lower respiratory disease were 9649, 7659, 2385,
and 2277, respectively. These translated to a percentage rate of 152.6, 116.5, 39.4, and 36
compared to 161.2, 167, 40.5, and 40.5% within the entire state. Moreover, the morbidity and
mortality rates related to illnesses such as stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, suicide and
kidney disease as well as pneumonia at 2202, 1628, 1193, 686, 676, and 638. These translated to
34%, 24.2%, 18.7%, 12.2%, 10.4%, 9.8% compared to 36.5%, 25.4%, 20.9%, 10.3%, 13.2%,
and 15.1% respectively (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016). Seemingly, the data

on mortality rates across Minnesota indicates that the major causes of their occurrence are related
to firearms use at a rate of 374 incidents while those across the United States were 33,390
translating to 6.6 and 10.2% respectively (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016).
Additionally, mortality rates in Minnesota occurred as a result of homicide and drug poisoning at
101 (1.9%) and 517 (9.6%) compared to those at the national level at 15809 (5.1%) and 47055
(14.7%) respectively as of 2016.
Most fundamentally, the analysis and critical review of the various sources of
information related to Longfellow revealed that the Department of Health in Minnesota
collaborates with the Minnesota Center for Health Statistics (MCHS) in the coordination of
health data efforts at the state and local levels. The partnership between these entities further
facilitates the provision of technical assistance and consultation with the various partners. For
instance, the multiple sources indicate that crucial health issues facing Longfellow are as a result
of disparities in factors such as access to education, socio-economic factors, medical insurance,
and other environmental problems. On the one hand, with regards to health issues, the
Department of Health indicates that in 2007, the residents of Minneapolis and neighboring
communities raised concern over increased noise. They thus demanded the amendment of the
soundproofing decree to secure their homes (Department of Health, 2018). Moreover, similar to
other parts of the world, Longfellow has experienced its share of global warming brought about
by factors such as emission of toxic gases due to dependence on carbon. These have been
followed closely by issues such as soil contamination.
Besides, organizations such as the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency are tasked with
the responsibility of ensuring that the agricultural products which include fertilizers, pesticides or
treated lumber are used appropriately in the prevention of drainage into the various water

sources. Similarly, there are waste disposal regulations that necessitate recycling, reuse, and
utilization of biodegradable products that do not contain arsenic concentrations. However,
despite these measures, studies indicate that environmental risks were experienced in the region
as raw materials stockpiled on a 5-acre triangular shaped property (CMC Heartland Lite Yard)
located on the corner of 28th Street and Hiawatha Avenue in South Minneapolis (Department of
Health, 2018). Wind erosion dispersed the contaminants into the areas surrounding the CMC site,
thereby affecting the nearby residential properties and approximately one and a half blocks west
and northwest of the site on Longfellow.
Interpretation of the Results
As pointed out above, the occurrence of the significant health issues facing the people of
Longfellow is based on factors such as disparities in the access to medical insurance, the
prevalence of crime, and the socio-economic status of the residents. On the one hand, the total
population of people with insurance coverage status as per 2014 was 4,575 residents in
Longfellow. On the other hand, the rate of crime reported in Longfellow between 2016 and 2017
was approximately 13, 019 incidents among 100,000 people. Among the highest standard of
incidents reported were violent crimes at 1, 475, which was relatively above that of Minneapolis
at 1,101.
Further studies have shown that the general crime rate in Longfellow is 374% higher than
that at the national average (Areavibes, 2019). For instance, for every 100,000 people, there are
35.67 crime incidents reported daily while there are 1 in 8 chances of becoming a victim of any
crime. However, between 2006 and 2012 and under the Chief of police (Tim Dolan), the rate of
crime steadily dropped from, 4,744 incidents to 3,720 while the police benefited from new video

and gunfire locator resources (Black, 2019). Contrastingly, homicides increased by 105%, and
rape cases were at their highest rate.
Conversely, the total number of employed individuals as per 2015 was 2,507 with age
ranges that differ significantly. The employed individuals aged twenty-nine years or younger
were 532 (21.2%), while those between 30 and 54 years were 1, 457 (58.1%), and 55 years and
older accounted for 518 (20.7%) (Wilder Research, 2016). As per a study conducted in 2013, the
median household income in Longfellow was $58,440 while the poverty rate was approximately
14.8%. However, in 2016, the median household income ranged between $50,000 and $74,999 at
a population of 450 people, which accounted for 20.5%. Similarly, the poverty levels in the same
year were 14.9% among people aged between 25 and 34 years (Niche, 2017). Additionally, the
employment rate between people aged 29 years and below in the same years was 532 (21.1%)
while those aged 30-54 years accounted for 1, 457 at 58.1%, and 55 years and above were 518
(20.7%). In total, the total number of people employed as per 2016 was 2,507.

Comparison of the Trends in the Studies
Though different and carried out in distinct regions, the various studies highlighted herein
have pointed out crucial information regarding the welfare of the people living in Longfellow
and its environs. Firstly, the studies have shown significant similarities in the exemplification of
the processes carried out within communities to ensure public health objectives are realized. For
instance, in pointing out the correlations between health organizations within a community, these
studies have facilitated the identification of the various measures put in place in safeguarding the
welfare of the people. Similarly, it has boosted the awareness of significant factors affecting the

people by increasing their vulnerability to different diseases and steps taken, over the years, to
alleviate the situation.
Moreover, the studies portray similar sentiments of the authors and different
organizations as they concur on the fact that the maintenance of public health and safeguarding
the welfare of the people necessitates the inclusion of the various stakeholders in the decision-
making process. These stakeholders include the organizations responsible for providing health
care services to the people, caregivers, the community members, and other partners that have the
interest of the community at heart.
Arguably, the epidemiologic profiling of Longfellow, as the primary objective of the
studies reviewed, has contributed to the identification of the activities carried out within the
region and its environs. For instance, the studies have shown the strengths of the community as
home to several advancements in infrastructure, top-ranking health facilities, and professional
sports teams.

Disparities, Limitations, and gaps in the Information
Conversely, the sources of information used in this paper differ significantly with regards
to the methods applied in the epidemiologic profiling process. On the one hand, the studies
indicate an insufficiency of information regarding the collaboration between health organizations
and community partners. On the other hand, they portray different health care deficits and
shortcomings associated with the community members with regards to their socio-economic,
educational, and healthy lifestyles. For instance, some of the studies indicate that the public
health issues facing Longfellow are as a result of an increase in the people’s vulnerability to

chronic illnesses such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and kidney, among others. On
the other hand, different studies indicate that the deterioration of the health of the people of
Longfellow emanates from factors such as high rates of crime reported within the region that
ultimately increase the risk for morbidity as well as mortality among the residents.
Similarly, Longfellow residents are faced with the challenge of teenage pregnancies and
environmental exposure to toxic gases, water, and soil. These factors occur as a result of the
inadequacy of law enforcement officers within the community, diversity of the residents, and the
disposal of toxic waste products at proximity to the residential areas. Although government
officials have extensively addressed some of these issues, studies indicate that they continue to
pose significant threats to the welfare of the people which is characterized by the increased rates
of deaths related to drug poisoning, suicide, and chronic lower respiratory disease (Center for
Disease Control and Prevention, 2016). More precisely, these factors indicate a substantial gap
in the development of partnerships and collaborations between entities such as the law
enforcement agencies, administrative and leadership organizations, health facilities, and other
policy-makers in the region.
Regarding the limitations in the studies highlighted herein, it is apparent that the various
organizations involved share common interests in improving the public health of the people
living in Longfellow, Minneapolis. However, the inadequacy of information in some studies
leads to significant limitations in the identification of a suitable plan of action to address the
deficits identified. For instance, failure to portray how the partnership with health organizations
and community partners can be leveraged and expanded hinders the identification of the
characteristics of the network involved in the implementation of programs such as CHIP in a
community. According to McCullough, Eisen-Cohen, & Salas (2016), the collaboration between

community organizations on health improvement processes facilitates the exploration of
longitudinal trends and network characteristics by comparing them with the individuals’ health
behavior, outcome changes, and status.
Nevertheless, in spite of these shortcomings, the suitable care approach to address the
deficiencies identified herein would involve the creation of awareness and educating the
members on the risks associated with the various activities carried out. These would be coupled
with the encouragement of the members to visit the nearby healthcare facilities for early
diagnosis and treatment of their prevalent conditions. Most fundamentally, the medical
practitioners, in collaboration with the Longfellow Community Council and the law enforcers,
should work collaboratively to reduce the rates of crime through synthesizing the residents on the
dangers of crime, apprehending the perpetrators, and the provision of affordable care to the
disadvantaged (McCullough, Eisen-Cohen & Salas, 2016). Although the Affordable Care Act
exists in Longfellow, policymakers, and caregivers within the community need to extend their
services to the people who do not have medical coverage due to various reasons.


Areavibes. (2019). Longfellow, MN Crime Rates & Crime Map.


Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016, July 7). Stats of the State of Minnesota.
Department of Health. (2018). Minnesota Center for Health Statistics home.
Eric Black. (2019, January 17). Politics & Policy | MinnPost.
James, C. (2019, January 6). Longfellow Neighborhood in South Minneapolis Profile.
McCullough, J. M., Eisen-Cohen, E., & Salas, S. B. (2016). Partnership capacity for community
health improvement plan implementation: findings from a social network analysis. BMC
Public Health, 16(1).