The designation of “age friendly” has clearly engaged the attention of scholars and leading experts in the field of aging. A search of PubMed references citing the term produced 15 results in the 5‐year period from 2006 to 2011; that number increased to 572 in the period from 2015 to 2019. The work, notably led by the World Health Organization with the initiation of age‐friendly cities and age‐friendly communities, has now sparked a movement for the creation of age‐friendly health systems and age‐friendly public health systems. Now more than ever, in an era of pandemics, it seems wise to create an ecosystem where each of the age‐friendly initiatives can create synergies and additional momentum as the population continues to age. Work of a global nature is especially important given the array of international programs and scientific groups focused on improving the lives of older adults along with their care and support system and our interconnectedness as a world community. In this article, we review the historical evolution of age‐friendly programs and describe a vision for an age‐friendly ecosystem that can encompass the lived environment, social determinants of health, the healthcare system, and our prevention‐focused public health system.

A mixed-methods approach was taken to describe lessons learned by local health department leaders during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York State and to document leaders' assessments of their departments' emergency preparedness capabilities and capacities. Leaders participating in a survey rated the effectiveness of their department's capabilities and capacities in administrative and public health preparedness, epidemiology, and communications on a scale from 1 to 5; those partaking in focus groups answered open-ended questions about the same 4 topics. Subjects rated intragovernmental activities most effective ( x = 4.41, SD = 0.83) and reported receiving assistance from other county agencies. They rated level of supplies least effective ( x = 3.03, SD = 1.01), describing low supply levels and inequitable distribution of testing materials and personal protective equipment among regions. Local health departments in New York require more state and federal aid to maintain the public health workforce in preparation for future emergencies.