Public Health in the Rockies 2026

Public health professionals are trained to solve problems. But the most persistent challenges facing public health organizations today — burnout, equity gaps, community trust, cross-sector coordination — resist the kind of solving we are trained for. They are adaptive challenges, not technical ones. And adaptive challenges cannot be resolved by authority alone. They require leadership from everyone in the system, regardless of role or title.

This session begins with a single, clarifying distinction: authority and leadership are not the same thing. Authority is the act of providing direction and order in exchange for cooperation. Leadership is mobilizing yourself and others to make progress on daunting challenges. Authority is a role. Leadership is an activity — and anyone can exercise it. Participants will explore what this distinction means in practice and where in their own organizations the two are most commonly confused.

From there, participants will apply the technical versus adaptive challenge framework to a real challenge from their own work. This is not a theoretical exercise. Participants will examine an actual problem they are facing, diagnose its nature, and begin to surface what kind of response it actually requires — and who needs to be involved in making progress.

The session closes with a structured peer consultation practice using Troika Consulting from Liberating Structures. In rotating groups of three, participants bring a real challenge, receive powerful questions from peers, and listen without defending. The experience builds the habit of asking before advising — a foundational leadership behavior that transforms how teams diagnose and respond to adaptive challenges together.

Participants will leave with one reframed challenge, a set of questions worth sitting with, and a leadership practice they can use the following week.

Instructional Methodologies: Brief didactic framing of authority versus leadership and technical versus adaptive work; individual challenge identification and small-group diagnosis; Troika Consulting (Liberating Structures) as structured peer practice; large-group debrief focused on insight and next action.

Measuring Skill Development: A brief post-session reflection will ask each participant to name the challenge they brought, the most useful question they received, and one leadership action they will take within the next two weeks.

Artificial intelligence is showing up everywhere, in the news, in our inboxes, and increasingly in our workflows, but for many public health professionals, the big question remains: how does this actually help me do my job? This interactive skill-building session is designed for practitioners who are curious about AI but haven't yet found their footing. No prior expertise required, just an openness to experimenting.

In this 90-minute hands-on session, presenters from Omni Institute will guide participants through a structured exploration of AI tools applied directly to public health challenges. The session opens with a warm-up activity designed to lower the stakes, spark creativity, and build both confidence and community among participants.

From there, participants will work in small groups through a series of facilitated exercises using real AI tools. Each exercise is anchored to common public health tasks such as synthesizing community feedback, drafting communications, exploring data patterns, or designing program materials, with guided prompts that participants can adapt and take back to their own organizations. Small groups will also have the opportunity to apply what they've learned to a realistic public health scenario, practicing how to integrate AI tools into their existing workflows.

The session closes with structured reflection and peer sharing. Participants will leave with practical strategies and resources tailored to public health use cases that they can begin applying immediately.

In the United States, ~14.1% of the population relies on private wells for drinking water. In Colorado, that estimate is closer to 7%. Although the Safe Drinking Water Act charges the Environmental Protection Agency with setting regulations for water quality to ensure that specified contaminants are not present above the Maximum Contaminant Level, private wells are not included under the umbrella of regulatory authority for public water systems. Concurrently, there exists a very limited support framework for domestic well users in Colorado and nationally. The purpose of this session is to share what private well stewardship workshops revealed about how community members learn, engage with, and act on well water management, and to help others apply such insights in their own programs.

The session will cover the following content: 1) Private Well Stewardship and Why It Matters 2) Workshop Design & Approach 3) Stakeholders and Community Engagement Strategies 4) Key findings from the workshops.

Alongside a short presentation from the facilitators, participants will engage in several hands-on activities to build their skills. Examples include interactive activities where participants will assess how private well use becomes a public health issue, a real-world case study of the Boulder County Public Health–academic partnership, small-group mapping of key stakeholders and partnership strategies, and guided discussions on how local public health agencies can adapt private well stewardship efforts within their own county context. Audience polls will be used to explore participants’ current familiarity with private wells, perceived local public health agencies (LPHA) roles, and barriers to engaging private well users. An applied activity will invite participants to identify one potential partner, one local barrier, and one first step for advancing private well stewardship in their jurisdiction. The session will conclude with an open forum for participants to ask questions, share insights, and discuss opportunities for strengthening private well stewardship across Colorado communities. Recommendations for resources and partnership approaches to support future LPHA engagement in private well stewardship will be provided.

This session supports best practices and skill development by introducing practical approaches for private well stewardship, helping participants strengthen skills in community engagement, partnership development, and applied public health practice. Through the Boulder County case study, participants will examine how LPHAs can collaborate with academic partners to better understand private well users’ concerns, testing behaviors, and stewardship practices. The session will also highlight regulatory gaps, equity considerations, and communication challenges in private well use. By engaging in applied activities, participants will identify local opportunities, barriers, and potential partners for advancing private well stewardship within their own communities.

A pre- and post-workshop assessment will be used to measure knowledge and skills developed during the session. Using a brief survey, participants’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding private well stewardship, LPHA roles, community engagement, and partnership development will be assessed before and after the workshop. A brief qualitative assessment will also be included post-session to understand what participants’ most valuable takeaways, learnings, and how they plan to apply private well stewardship strategies within their own public health context.

This session will highlight The Power of Purposeful Partnerships and how the Healthy Families Partnership (HFP) of Douglas County directly embodies the conference theme, Stronger Together. Established in 2023 in response to community-identified needs, HFP brings together 15 expert organizations—including all four county hospitals—to improve maternal and child health across the community. Guided by child fatality review data, the Public Health Improvement Plan (PHIP), and continuous community feedback, HFP builds strong connections across sectors to enhance access to essential services and resources that promote maternal and child health. The partnership was intentionally designed to break down traditional silos and create meaningful, sustained collaboration among healthcare providers, community organizations, local agencies, and families.

HFP was developed through collaboration with 15 subject matter expert organizations, including all four county hospitals, local government, schools, libraries, mental health providers, and other family-focused agencies. The initiative distributes specially prepared “new family bags” containing a sleep sack, safe sleep education, developmental milestone information, child passenger safety guidance, perinatal mental health resources, and materials from partner organizations. Community engagement involving individuals with lived experience is central to HFP’s model and continues to inform the evolution of services.

Since its launch, HFP has strengthened cross-sector relationships, increased family engagement in planning, aligned messaging across organizations, and expanded coordinated access to services from birth onward. In its inaugural year, HFP distributed bags to more than 4,300 families who gave birth in Douglas County, demonstrating tangible community impact.

Participants will gain actionable strategies to launch and sustain community-centered partnerships rooted in shared purpose and responsive to community-identified needs, strengthening maternal and child health outcomes.

Request for 1-Hour Session:

Requesting a 60-minute session ensures at least 15 minutes for participants to engage with presenters through discussion and questions, supporting meaningful dialogue and practical application to their own community contexts.

The Colorado Community Survey Data Results Report offers a comprehensive, statewide snapshot of the lived experiences, challenges, and priorities of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and their families. Across 503 responses, 288 of which were validated, participants shared a resounding call for systems that are accessible, person-centered, and inclusive across every stage of life. The findings reveal both progress in areas like respect, engagement, and access to medical care, and continued disparities in communication, behavioral health, housing, and employment.
Respondents consistently reported difficulty navigating fragmented systems, especially during major transitions such as aging out of school or the loss of family caregivers. Families emphasized the importance of succession planning, clear benefits guidance, and conflict-free case management to sustain quality of life and autonomy over time.


Employment data showed both potential and inequity, 57% have work experience, but only 15% feel confident in finding jobs without rejection. Families cited inconsistent job coaching and employer bias as major barriers. In education, only 28% of respondents were currently enrolled, revealing significant gaps in accommodation, communication, and accountability within schools.
Most respondents live with family (57%), reflecting limited access to affordable, accessible, and independent housing options. Transportation challenges, especially in rural areas, compound these barriers, with 78% depending on family or informal supports and only 22% using public transit. Accessibility and safety issues were widespread.

Thematic and content analyses from focus groups reinforced survey findings: participants value belonging, meaningful work, and community engagement, while expressing deep concern about system fragility, workforce shortages, and aging caregiver crises. Families urged for a shift from reactive systems to proactive, disability-informed solutions that honor lived experience.

As first year medical students interested in medical student well-being, we initiated a literature review on well-being initiatives by medical training institutions. Our review revealed that while wellness interventions such as mindfulness, reflection, and compassion-based curricula have been well received and shown variable benefits in reducing stress and burnout, their effectiveness is limited when programs are isolated from curriculum or fail to address structural stressors. Outcome measures remain inconsistent and students from underrepresented backgrounds face additional burdens that are largely unacknowledged, with few interventions using culturally responsive approaches or disaggregating outcomes by identity.

Motivated by these findings, we created and implemented an event called “Flourishing Fest,” a novel initiative grounded in the KNN Framework for Flourishing. Flourishing Fest took place over two-weeks and was designed to mitigate identified barriers to flourishing. The student-led, self-guided activities were chosen to promote connection, physical activity, playfulness, presence, and renewal. Students participated via bingo format that encouraged exploration and personal choice in selecting activities aligned with individual needs and preferences. Using an anonymous post-event survey with validated Likert-scale questions, we assessed multiple dimensions of flourishing. Survey results and qualitative feedback demonstrated students’ appreciation for the impact on connection, physical activity, mindfulness, and its contribution to an institutional culture that supports flourishing.

We have adapted the Flourishing Fest bingo card for subsequent events as well as for a KNN Student Conference. For PHiR, we have created a collaborative design activity. Small groups would identify barriers to flourishing within their own organizations and design their own Flourishing Fest bingo card tailored to their organizational context including implementation planning. Bingo cards would be displayed and there would be a gallery walk for participants provide feedback to each other. Facilitators will highlight common themes, celebrate innovative approaches, and reinforce the framework of inclusive inquiry, implementation, evaluation, and iteration.

Across the US, 7.4 million children are exposed to wildfire smoke annually. Children are one of the most susceptible populations to the health effects of air pollution, seen in changes in lung function, lung development, and existing respiratory disease exacerbation. Recent evidence also shows the mental health effects of wildfire smoke exposure, with children exhibiting symptoms of depression, anxiety, and other “internalizing symptoms” up to one year after exposure. School programs have been effective in implementing interventions to address obesity, suicide, sexual health, and other public health concerns. As exposure to air pollution in home environments can vary greatly between children, schools are a common ground among youth to reduce exposure to both wildfire smoke and other airborne pollutants. We partnered with five high schools in Colorado to implement a Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) project where youth learn about air quality, collect and analyze air quality data, and create and implement interventions to better prepare and protect their school community from exposure to airborne pollutants. YPAR is a youth-led, adult-guided approach to involving youth in research projects from start to finish, allowing youth to voice their experiences, develop research skills, and be agents of change. In this presentation, we will cover our approach and lessons learned from the first three years of the project, and discuss emergent themes from interviews with teachers and administrators engaged in our project. Our preliminary results revealed that teachers were enthusiastic about their students learning about air quality through this project, but were concerned about engagement and commitment, as the students who typically get involved are high achievers with several other commitments on their plates. To address these concerns, we will discuss strategies to increase student engagement through project-based learning and student incentives (i.e., Seal of Climate Literacy).

This session will describe CDPHE's Environmental Equity and Cumulative Impacts Analysis work, including a pilot research study underway in the East Colfax neighborhood of Aurora. The presenter will discuss the study methodology, how it will offer a novel understanding of the effects of multiple environmental exposures, and the intended public health benefits to residents of the community. More broadly, the presenter will describe how this pilot can inform an understanding of cumulative impacts across the state and subsequently guide policy. The session will include an overview of a variety of resources under development to support local cumulative impacts work. Participants will have the opportunity to reflect on how this work is applicable in their community and explore available data.

Background: The Trailhead Institute is a Public Health Institute and partners extensively with community-based organizations (CBOs). Community-driven solutions involve approaches that are led, informed, and sustained by the communities they aim to serve. This approach prioritizes local knowledge and equitable partnerships. These solutions take different forms and necessitate support from behind or beside the people advancing the work. CBOs are essential, on-the-ground, trusted partners in public health, yet they often lack the resources or support to provide these important services.

Methods: This session provides capacity-supporting organizations such as Trailhead Institute, local governments, and funders with examples of structural and administrative support to help CBOs be rooted and stable resources for their communities. Administrative and capacity-building services are highly necessary for the health of an organization and yet often undervalued. This has led many individuals, unincorporated collectives, 501c3, and even LLCs to seek fiscal sponsorship for their philanthropic endeavors. In its 32 years of existence, Trailhead has fiscally sponsored over 85 different projects through four of the six fiscal sponsorship models. Investing in trusted, values-aligned partnerships sustains incredible, innovative work that can transform public health.

Results: Providing organizational support has a multiplier effect that allows public health to have a greater reach, while recognizing the need to adjust our work so we can walk alongside communities rather than driving a rigid model. A relationship-focused, fiscally sound, and constructively critical approach creates mutually beneficial growth and success.

Implications: The session will show how working with unlikely partnerships that are aligned in mission and values leads to a multi-tiered approach for public health to achieve its goals. Once attendees understand the "why and how" of our approach, we will also share how we are advancing our work beyond our partnerships to provide technical assistance to other nonprofits.

Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming healthcare systems, communications, education, social services, and public health infrastructure. Yet, many public health professionals have received little training on how to ethically evaluate, responsibly use, or critically respond to AI tools that increasingly shape community health outcomes, public trust, and access to information. As AI becomes more integrated into public-facing systems, public health professionals need practical skills to navigate emerging ethical challenges while maintaining equity-centered, trauma-informed practices.

This interactive skill-building session introduces participants to a practical framework for trauma-informed AI ethics in public health practice. The training will explore real-world applications of AI in communications, program development, data analysis, healthcare access, education, and community engagement. Participants will examine key ethical concerns including algorithmic bias, misinformation, digital inequities, privacy concerns, accessibility barriers, and the disproportionate impacts AI systems can have on strategically undervalued communities.

The session emphasizes practical application rather than technical expertise. Participants will learn to critically assess AI-generated information, identify harms and biases, apply equity-centered decision-making frameworks, and develop safer communication practices when using AI tools in public health settings. The training will also provide guidance for strengthening public trust and maintaining human-centered approaches in increasingly digital environments.

Beyond understanding the ethical implications of AI, participants will be guided through a structured process to develop their own AI ethics framework. Through reflection and facilitated exercises, attendees will identify their values, define boundaries around AI use, establish criteria for when AI should and should not be used, and begin drafting ethical guidelines that can inform organizational policies and decision-making. Participants will leave with greater confidence in evaluating AI tools and a foundation for responsible AI governance within their workplaces and communities.

Instructional methodologies will include interactive discussion, case-study analysis, guided reflection, scenario-based learning, and individual framework development. Participants will engage with public health scenarios involving AI-generated messaging, ethical dilemmas, and community trust challenges.

Skill development will be measured through participant engagement in scenario analysis, application of ethical evaluation frameworks during group activities, and completion of a personalized AI ethics framework that demonstrates their ability to identify risks, apply trauma-informed principles, articulate values-based boundaries, and propose ethical public health responses. Participants will leave with practical tools, discussion frameworks, and a customizable ethics guide they can immediately apply within their organizations and communities.

This session supports best practices in public health by centering health equity, cultural humility, accessibility, ethical communication, and community trust. It aligns with Colorado’s Foundational Public Health Capabilities, including Health Equity and the Social Determinants of Health, Organizational Competencies, Communications, and Policy Development & Support. The training is especially relevant as public health professionals increasingly encounter AI technologies without sufficient ethical guidance, policy frameworks, or workforce preparation.

By fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and collaborative learning around emerging technologies, this session directly supports the conference theme, Stronger Together: Public Health in the Heart of the Rockies. It encourages participants to collectively build responsible, equitable, and community-centered approaches to AI that strengthen public health systems while protecting human dignity, trust, and accountability.

Background: Timely access to psychiatric support remains limited for primary care clinicians in rural and underserved communities, yet many available resources like provider-to-provider consultation programs remain underutilized. To address underutilization and integrate such programs with workforce training, we developed a data-guided educational model using psychiatry consultation patterns.

Methods: Requests were reviewed from two psychiatry consultation programs at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine: eConsults, an asynchronous, EHR-based service, and Effective Access and Support from Psychiatry (EASY), a phone-based service. Submissions (97 EASY; 2,136 eConsults) were reviewed to identify diagnoses, submission characteristics, and clinical questions, informing the development of an Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) curriculum for primary care clinicians. ECHO sessions included case-based discussions and peer exchange, promoting application and reflection while aligning with practice-based instructional design theory. Post-series evaluations assessed learning, confidence, and intended use of consultation pathways.

Results: Thirty-three individuals participated; nine completed a post-series evaluation. Most participants were direct care providers (85%) and served Medicaid patients (73%); one-third worked in Colorado’s rural or frontier counties (32%). All respondents reported increased understanding of how and when to submit consultation requests. Seventy-eight percent intended to use eConsults and 89% intended to use EASY within six months. Self-reported high confidence using psychiatry access programs increased from 11% pre- to 44% post-series. In open-ended responses, most respondents planned to submit higher-quality consultations or use consultation pathways more frequently.

Implications: This consultation-training feedback loop offers a practical strategy for strengthening community psychiatric care. By converting consultation experience into training, the model improved clinicians’ understanding, confidence, and intended use of access supports. For communities with limited access to psychiatric specialists, this approach may reduce reliance on referrals which require travel, delay care, or impose high costs. The model is adaptable to other specialties seeking to align consultation and access-focused practice.