Cancer Causes & Control

, Volume 29, Issue 12, pp 1205–1220 | Cite as

How the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership shapes the public health workforce

  • Margaret M. FarrellEmail author
  • Kelsy M. Gibson
  • Angela Marler
  • Leslie Given
  • Aubrey Van Kirk Villalobos
  • Candace Deaton Maynard
  • Frank S. Bright
  • Ginny Thompson Kirklin
  • Truemenda C. Green
  • Melanie Ruhe
  • Julia Thorsness
  • Stephanie Weiss
Original paper


This paper explores how, through its extensive network of partners, the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (National Partnership) has provided a robust array of trainings, learning institutes, webinars, workshops, mentorship programs, and direct technical assistance to comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions over the past 20 years. Mapping these activities to specific cancer control competencies revealed that the efforts of the National Partnership adequately address the core competencies necessary for an effective workforce and have the potential to increase practitioner capacity to adopt and implement evidence-based cancer control programs. Ensuring the continued availability and uptake of these tools, trainings and partnerships could potentially address gaps and barriers in the public health workforce related to evidence-based practice.


Comprehensive cancer control Workforce development Training and technical assistance Competency mapping Cancer prevention and control 



The authors thank Sarah Shafir, Lorrie Graaf, and Todd Tyler of the American Cancer Society and Dalena Nguyen, formerly of the National Cancer Institute, for their assistance in data collection and presentation. This research was supported in part by an appointment (K. Gibson) to the Research Participation Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Hohman K, Rochester P, Kean T, Belle-Isle L (2010) The CCC National Partnership: an example of organizations collaborating on comprehensive cancer control. Cancer Causes Control 21(12):1979–1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    All Hands on Deck: Making the Case for Comprehensive Cancer Control Retrieved from Accessed 10 May 2018
  3. 3.
    Ye J, Leep C, Robin N, Newman S (2015) Perception of workforce skills needed among public health professionals in local health departments: staff versus top executives. J Public Health Manag Pract 21(Suppl 6):S151–S158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tilson H, Gebbie KM (2004) The public health workforce. Annu Rev Public Health 25:341–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Institute of Medicine (2003) The future of the public’s health in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fineberg HV, Green GM, Ware JH, Anderson BL (1994) Changing public health training needs: professional education and the paradigm of public health. Annu Rev Public Health 15:237–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Rochester PW, Townsend JS, Given L, Krebill H, Balderrama S, Vinson C (2010) Comprehensive cancer control: progress and accomplishments. Cancer Causes Control 21(12):1967–1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vinson C, La Porta M, Todd W, Palafox NA, Wilson KM, Fairley T (2010) Research and comprehensive cancer control coalitions. Cancer Causes Control 21(12):2033–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hohman K, Rochester P, Kean T, Belle-Isle L (2010) The CCC National Partnership: an example of organizations collaborating on comprehensive cancer control. Cancer Causes Control 21:1979. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Hannon PA, Fernandez ME, Williams RS, Mullen PD, Escoffery C, Kreuter MW et al (2010) Cancer control planners’ perceptions and use of evidence-based programs. J Public Health Manag Pract 16(3):E1–E8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    La Porta M, Hagood H, Kornfeld J, Treiman K (2007) Partnership as a means for reaching special populations: evaluating the NCI’s CIS Partnership Program. J Cancer Educ 22(1 Suppl):S35–S40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andrew C, von Eschenbach (2005) Foreword. J Health Commun 10(Suppl 1):5. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Perocchia RS, Galassi A, Jacobs R, Krauss N, Kim LeMaitre M, Rutledge S (2007) The NCI’s Cancer Information Service Staff Training Program: A Foundation for Excellence. J Cancer Educ 22(S1):S8–S17. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.
    Sanchez MA, Vinson CA, Porta ML, Viswanath K, Kerner JF, Glasgow RE (2012) Evolution of Cancer Control P.L.A.N.E.T.: moving research into practice. Cancer Causes Control 23(7):1205–1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    National Cancer Institute. Research Tested Intervention Programs (RTIPs) National Cancer Institute; Bethesda, MD (2018) Accessed 20 July 2018
  24. 24.
    Farrell MM, La Porta M, Gallagher A, Vinson C, Bernal SB (2014) Research to reality: moving evidence into practice through an online community of practice. Prev Chronic Dis 11:130272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Purcell EP, Mitchell C, Celestin MD, Evans KR, Haynes V, McFall A, Troyer L, Sanchez MA (2013) Research to Reality (R2R) Mentorship Program: building partnership, capacity, and evidence. Health Promot Pract 14(3): 321–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
    Brawley OW, Gansler T, Wender RC (2018) Toward the control of cancer. CA: A Cancer J Clin. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Leeman J, Calancie L, Hartman MA et al (2015) What strategies are used to build practitioners’ capacity to implement community-based interventions and are they effective?: A systematic review. Implement Sci 10:80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
  34. 34.
    Sanchez M, Purcell EP, Michie JS, Tsakraklides SP, La Porta M, Vinson C (2014) Building cancer control capacity: A mixed-method evaluation of the research to reality (R2R) mentorship program. Prev Chronic Dis 11:E24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Purcell EP, Mitchell C, Celestin MD et al (2013) Research to reality (R2R) mentorship program. Health Promot Pract 14(3):321–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Research To Reality. About R2R Mentorship Program. Accessed 13 Mar 2018
  37. 37.
    National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO). Building Local Comprehensive Cancer Control Coalitions: Lessons Learned from Local Health Departments. 2013. Accessed 20 July 2018
  38. 38.
    Weiss S, Ruhe M, Green T (2018) Local implementation and capacity of cancer prevention and control: a National Review of Local Health Department Activities. National Association of County and City Health Officials, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Local Community Health Programs. Accessed 20 July 2018
  40. 40.
    Heston AH, Schwartz AL, Justice-Gardiner H, Hohman KH (2015) Addressing physical activity needs of survivors by developing a community-based exercise program: LIVESTRONG® at the YMCA. Clin J Oncol Nurs 19(2):213–217. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Irwin ML, Cartmel B, Harrigan M, Sanft TB, Wong C, Hughes M, Hootsmans N, Winterhalter B, Shockro L, O’Connor K, Tolaney SM, Mayer EL, Yung RL, Freedman RA, Ligibel JA (2015) Impact of the LIVESTRONG at the YMCA Program on physical activity, fitness, and quality of life in cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 33(15_suppl):9508–9508Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Irwin ML, Cartmel B, Harrigan M, Li F, Sanft T, Shockro L, O’connor K, Campbell N, Tolaney SM, Mayer EL, Ligibel JA (2017) Effect of the LIVESTRONG® at the YMCA exercise program on physical activity, fitness, quality of life and fatigue in cancer survivors. Cancer 123(7):1249–1258. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Maylahn CM (2009) Evidence-based public health: a fundamental concept for public health practice. Annu Rev Public Health 30:175–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
  47. 47.
    Fields RP, Stamatakis KA, Duggan K, Brownson RC (2015) Importance of scientific resources among local public health practitioners. Am J Public Health 105(suppl 2):S288–S294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Jacob R, Allen P, Ahrendt L, Brownson R (2017) Learning about and using research evidence among public health practitioners. Am J Prev Med 52(3S3):S304–S308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. government work and its text is not subject to copyright protection in the United States; however, its text may be subject to foreign copyright protection 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret M. Farrell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kelsy M. Gibson
    • 2
  • Angela Marler
    • 1
  • Leslie Given
    • 3
  • Aubrey Van Kirk Villalobos
    • 4
  • Candace Deaton Maynard
    • 1
  • Frank S. Bright
    • 5
  • Ginny Thompson Kirklin
    • 6
  • Truemenda C. Green
    • 7
  • Melanie Ruhe
    • 8
  • Julia Thorsness
    • 9
  • Stephanie Weiss
    • 8
  1. 1.National Cancer Institute (NCI)BethesdaUSA
  2. 2.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)AtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Strategic Health ConceptsEarlysvilleUSA
  4. 4.George Washington University Cancer CenterWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.National Association of Chronic Disease DirectorsDecaturUSA
  6. 6.Susan G. Komen®HoustonUSA
  7. 7.Interventions Associates LLCAtlantaUSA
  8. 8.National Association of County and City Health OfficialsWashingtonUSA
  9. 9.The State of Alaska Comprehensive Cancer Control ProgramAnchorageUSA

Personalised recommendations