1015: PHIG Grant Management Improvements

JANSON SILVERS: 

This is the award-winning Public Health Review Morning Edition for Tuesday, October 21, 2025. I'm Janson Silvers. Now, today's news from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.

This morning, another installment of the PHIG Impact Report, a twice-a-month segment that showcases the Public Health Infrastructure Grant and how your colleagues across the nation are using it. Today, Amy Ferris, chief financial officer at the Washington State Department of Health. In her role, Ferris also serves as the PHIG principal investigator and works to provide oversight for the development, implementation, and management of the department's programs.

Thank you for joining us today, Amy. So, your department recently used PHIG funding to take on the task of centralizing its grant management system. Can you talk to us about how these upgrades contribute to stronger infrastructure and capabilities at your department?

AMY FERRIS: 

So, our agency, over 30% of our funding comes from the federal government, and so it's important for us to really look at, how do we utilize those funds, how do we maximize those funds as an organization, and to support our public health services? So, we've been on a journey of a funding transformation, really looking at, how do we have our priorities drive our investments, versus what was happening, is our funding was driving our priorities And with, you know, we have over 140 different federal grants that we're managing, and so, how do we do that as a way that we can again maximize those opportunities, increase transparency across the organization, and really support our programs to be successful In implementation of those? And so, we had started to really look at that funding stream and how we manage those. We manage them very decentralized, so programs managing them across the organization.

SILVERS: 

What are some of the things that your team took into consideration when you were deciding on a centralized approach?

FERRIS: 

I had went to, through ASTHO, had went to one of the CDC meetings where we actually got to meet with the CDC directors, and one of the key takeaways that they said at the end is one of the things you can do is centralize your grants management, and it's like, yes, we hear you, and we are looking at that. So, we really wanted to just make sure that we are consistent in our approach we're providing our programs. We did an analysis, and so finding out that you've got a program manager that plays a grant manager role, along with their other duties, so it's like a special duty as assigned, that they get to do, and so how do we do that? So, we really looked at how we manage it, did an analysis, and determined if we needed to continue to do this in a decentralized way, and what support services are needed and/or is there a benefit to bringing folks together and having a centralized approach?

SILVERS: 

And as you began the process, what were some of the specific steps your Department took to improve the management of the grants?

FERRIS: 

We really- the specifics of what we looked at was really looking at the roles. We had to clarify roles across the organization. You say grant management, and that's such a broad term, there's many job duties or activities that happen. And so, we really took a moment to clarify what's the difference between grants management and grants coordination. And then what of those things need to happen in a program, and what would be beneficial to do centrally, so that you have that consistency and that resource that is available to any program, regardless if they've done grants management before. And so, we really looked at roles. We clarified roles and responsibilities. We looked at our tools that we use, our templates, and we even, you know, through the PHIG investment, we were able to invest in some grant writers and some grant coordinators, because we had many programs like I said that they didn't have that expertise. They just assigned it to someone as needed when the moment arose, and we had many times that through the analysis, we found out some programs didn't even apply for grants because they didn't have the time or the resources to dedicate to do that, and it was a missed opportunity.

SILVERS: 

What would you say to other PHIG recipients out there who may be thinking about putting the grant funds towards upgrading their own grant management systems?

FERRIS: 

The advice, I would say, is engage your programs. You have to engage your customers, your programs when you're doing that analysis. When you're even- we pulled a focus group together, so you need to be able to have their voice at the table when you're analyzing. How things are working now, and what is that ideal state, what could be improved upon? So, definitely engaging your programs through that work. I think the other piece was we used a skilled facilitator and project manager to help us with this body of work, because some of those conversations are hard. You're getting into, you know, someone- someone has owned this, this has been theirs, and they feel a sense of loss, or they're losing control, and so having a skilled facilitator, project manager to help facilitate those conversations, and just being clear, we're doing this to support the programs and to support the agency as a whole.

SILVERS: 

Thank you so much for joining us today, Amy. We appreciate being able to learn about your team's experience and all the ways PHIG funding can be used to support programs like those in your department.

You can learn more about the Public Health Infrastructure Grant and how it supports vital public health programs across the country by visiting the PHIG website. We have a link in the show notes.

That'll do it for today. We're back tomorrow morning with more ASTHO news and information. I'm Janson Silvers. You're listening to the award-winning Public Health Review Morning Edition. Have a great day.