Foodborne illnesses remain a major public health concern in the U.S., responsible for an estimated 128,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths each year. In response, federal, state, and local governments invest heavily in surveillance systems designed to detect outbreaks early and contain their spread. A key source of this support is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and a new study from the University of Minnesota School of Public Health (SPH) underscores how vital CDC funding is in helping states improve their ability to track and respond to foodborne illness outbreaks nationwide.

The study analyzed CDC funding across states to correlate spending on surveillance programs with the incidence and severity of foodborne illnesses in each state. Using data from the CDC’s Foodborne Disease Outbreak Surveillance System, the study focused on three distinct CDC programs–FoodCORE, Food Safety Centers of Excellence (CoEs), and OutbreakNet Enhanced (OBNE)–that serve as cooperative agreements with states to support foodborne surveillance programs. In a state-by-state analysis, the researchers analyzed foodborne outbreak reporting rates in relation to state participation in the CDC programs and the level of funding received by each state.

The study, published in the Journal of Food Protection, found:

• States that received CDC program funding detected more outbreaks of foodborne illnesses.  From 2009–2022, states participating in CDC programs (FoodCORE, Food Safety CoEs, OBNE) reported significantly higher rates of foodborne illness outbreaks compared to states without program funding. For example, Food Safety CoE states reported 4.16 outbreaks per million people annually, compared to 1.54 in states with no programs.
• More funding meant better surveillance and reporting. Every additional dollar in per capita CDC funding was associated with nearly one additional reported outbreak per million people.
• Specific CDC programs promote best practices. Programs like FoodCORE that implement evidence-based surveillance methods—such as rapid interviewing and lab testing—were particularly effective and less sensitive to fluctuations in overall funding.

“Foodborne illnesses affect millions of Americans each year, yet many outbreaks go undetected due to inadequate surveillance systems,” said Madhura Vachon, lead author of the study. “Outbreak investigations are a critical part of our public health system because they help to identify the contributing factors and root causes of foodborne illness. This study shows that strategic federal investments improve outbreak reporting and help build an effective public health response system nationwide.”

The study suggests that future research should explore which specific interventions—like centralized complaint systems or student investigation teams—are most effective in improving surveillance. The study also  recommends sustained federal investment and expansion of evidence-based programs to reduce reporting disparities and strengthen the national response to foodborne threats.

Vachon conducted the study while she was a PhD candidate at SPH. SPH co-authors of the study include Assistant Professor Melanie Firestone, Professor Craig Hedberg, doctoral student Lexi Edmundson, and Thuy N. Kim (PhD ‘23).

Funding support for the study was provided by the Minnesota and Colorado Integrated Food Safety Centers of Excellence, which are supported by the Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Disease Cooperative Agreement through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.