L.A. County Bioterror Spending Problems Identified

NTI: An estimated $2 million of the federal grant money directed to Los Angeles County for bioterrorism preparedness has been used for public relations, response to unrelated health problems and the purchase of questionable services and supplies, the Los Angeles Times reported today.

The county spent some of the money on extras to participate in a 2004 smallpox vaccination drill because officials could not find enough volunteers. Central Casting received more than $57,000, while the county spent $10,000 on gift certificates and $13,600 for other gifts for the participants.

Most of the federal money has been spent to train first responders. However, the definition of terrorism readiness has sometimes been stretched, drawing concern from inside the county Health Services Department.

“Unless we have a compelling public message, this seems to be a big waste of taxpayer funds,” said John Wallace, head of external and government relations at the department, in a 2004 e-mail message. Wallace was addressing a proposed $1 million press campaign.

“I am concerned that it will appear that we are trying to spend grant dollars for the sake of not having to return them, and that is not acceptable,” he said.

The department has not used one out of every six dollars allocated by the federal government from 2002 to 2004 for bioterrorism readiness.

In that period, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention granted more than $2.7 billion to cities, states and counties to prepare for a bioterrorism attack. Los Angeles County received $83 million, $14 million of which was not spent.

As there has not been a biological attack, it is hard to say whether the spending issues have hurt preparedness. However, it is clear that the county has fallen behind on projects in important areas, such as the construction of a new public health laboratory.

According to documents reviewed by the Times, the county has spent:

— More than $128,000 on trinkets such as letter openers, whistles, flashlight and pens that have been given to the public;

— $1,000 for nylon discs for Public Health Week;

— $4,145 on stress balls, notepads and clipboards for a forensic epidemiology conference;

— at least $170,000 to train staff on how to prepare videos for online viewing;

— $4,675 for a teleprompter, as well as $450 for improvements to the machine;

— $2,187 for a laptop computer to write teleprompter scripts;

— $3,392 for a portable microphone;

— hundreds of dollars to replace a podium “damaged by rodents”;

— 70 high-end chairs that cost $600 each, as well as 800 computers; and

— $18,000 to print fliers and cards with West Nile virus information and $4,629 for printer cartridges in response to an “increased amount of bite reports” in connection with West Nile.

The California Health Services Department does not allow counties to spend bioterrorism funding on West Nile, according to Betsey Lyman, California’s deputy director for public health emergency preparedness.

Los Angeles County Public Health Director Jonathan Fielding defended the spending, arguing it meets federal guidelines. For example, CDC Julie Gerberding approved the West Nile spending, he said.

He said the teleprompter had been used three times in training and that it was cheaper to hire actors than to use country employees for the smallpox drill.

“Even actors might need to know how to reach the BT [bioterrorism] Web site or have the material available on how to prepare themselves — that was our thinking,” said Sharon Grigsby, county bioterrorism preparedness director.

The public health laboratory, which was supposed to be completed by November 2004, will not be done until late spring and is set to cost more than $15 million. Original estimates had the cost at $9 million, but increased because of rain and “unforeseen structural and infrastructure problems,” according to county records.

Various problems have been identified with Los Angeles County spending requests. Alison Johnson, director of the CDC state and local readiness division. Some restrictions have been placed on the county’s and better justification is now required.

“I would say they have more issues than what we would normally see,” Johnson said. “They definitely have more issues than average.”

When told of the spending irregularities discovered in the documents, she said, “You’ve raised some valid concerns.”

Donna Knutson, an official at the agency senior to Johnson, later said that Los Angeles County’s problems were not excessive (Charles Ornstein, Los Angeles Times, March 6).