minutes subject: meeting date: time: location: chair ... project steeri… · county of simcoe 1110...

County of Simcoe 1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, ON L0L 1X0

Main Line 705-726-9300 Toll Free 1-866-893-9300 Fax 705-792-5743 simcoe.ca

MINUTES

SUBJECT: Age-Friendly Community Project Steering Committee MEETING DATE: January 19, 2016 TIME: 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. LOCATION: Simcoe County Museum - Meeting Room B (1151 Highway 26, Minesing, Ontario L0L 1Y2) CHAIR: Jane Sinclair, General Manager, Health and Emergency Services ATTENDANCE:

Cathy Kytayko, Director of Social Housing, County of Simcoe Christina Strong, Public Education Trainer, Independent Living Services Simcoe Christy Tosh, Age-Friendly Community Planning Project Lead Connie Sheridan, Administrator, Georgian Manor David Parks, Director of Planning, Development & Tourism, County of Simcoe Denise Hayes, General Manager, Southern Georgian Bay Chamber of Commerce Dr. Kevin Present Willison, Lakehead University Emma Dickson, Public Interest Strategy & Present Communications Gayle Hall, Chief Librarian, County of Simcoe Georgina Veldhorst, Senior Director Planning, Integration & Community Engagement, Central LHIN Greg Bishop, General Manager, Social & Community Services, County of Simcoe Heather Hollingshead, Regional Services Coordinator, Spinal Cord Injury Ontario Jim Gough, Senior's Representative Joanne Lane, Accessibility Consultant, County of Simcoe Kevin Beaulieu, Executive Director, Public Interest Strategy & Communications Laura-Lynn Bourassa, Alzheimer’s Society Linda Flemington, Chair, CARP, Georgian Bay Mary Small Brett, Councillor, County of Simcoe Meredith Morison, Deputy Chief, Quality Programs, County of Simcoe Paramedic Services Sandra Robinson, Real Estate Manager, Procurement, Fleet & Property, County of Simcoe Sarah Orr-Shaw, Public Health Nurse, Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit Scott Warnock, Councillor, County of Simcoe Tom Johnston, Branch Manager, Seniors for Seniors (Simcoe-Muskoka) REGRETS:

Bob Bowles, Senior’s Representative Heather Owen, United Way Greater Simcoe County Karen Taillefer, Vice President, Patient Services, NSM CCAC Mardi Taylor, Regional Manager, Service and Operations, CNIB Ron Coutts, Senior's Representative Sandra Easson-Bruno, Senior Advisor, Planning, Integration, Evaluation & Community Engagement, NSM LHIN



1.0 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS (Jane Sinclair, Chair) Jane Sinclair, General Manager of Health and Emergency Services welcomed the group and provided a brief overview of the day.

2.0 AFC BACKGROUND PRESENTATION (Dr. Willison, Lakehead University) Dr. Willison provided the attached background presentation on Age-Friendly Communities. On January 27, 2016 the Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Association on Gerontology will be hosting a webinar on How Age-Friendly Communities can reduce social isolation. Individuals can register for the webinar at the following link: http://www.chnet-works.ca/index.php?option=com_rsevents&view=events&Itemid=6&lang=en Other resources that may be of interest include the Ontario Society (Coalition) of Senior Citizens (http://ocsco.ca/ossco_history) and the National Initiative for the Care of the Elderly (NICE) (http://www.nicenet.ca/).

3. AFC VIDEO (Christy Tosh, Project Lead)

The group watched a five (5) minute segment of the following YouTube video on Age-Friendly Communities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpWfr1YOF70

4.0 ROUNDTABLE INTRODUCTIONS (Jane Sinclair, Chair) Each member of the AFC Project Steering Committee introduced themselves and highlighted any current initiatives, projects or concerns related to the eight (8) AFC dimensions. Committee Members were asked to complete and submit a Committee Member Profile before leaving the meeting.

5.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE (Christy Tosh, Project Lead) The attached Terms of Reference for the AFC Project Steering Committee was reviewed and discussed by the Committee. It was suggested that the Committee mandate be revised to encompass the terms “accessibility” and “inclusivity”. Staff will revise the Terms of Reference and bring back to this Committee for final approval Eight Dimensions A discussion took place on where health and fitness would fit under the eight (8) aspects of community health. Some Committee members felts that it fit under Social Participation whereas others thought it would better fit under Community Support and Health Services. The eight (8) dimensions will be discussed in greater detail at the next meeting.

Terms of Reference to be revised. The eight (8) dimensions will be added to the next meeting agenda.



6.0 REVIEW BINDER CONTENT, PATHWAY, GUIDES, RESOURCES, ETC. (Christy Tosh, Project Lead) Christy Tosh reviewed the contents of the binder with the group. The Survey will be circulated to the Committee for review.

Circulate Survey to membership.

7.0 CONSULTANT DISCUSSION ON COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND PROFESSIONAL INTERVIEWS (Emma Dickson/Kevin Beaulieu, Public Interest) 7.1 Project Milestones Kevin Beaulieu from Public Interest provided an overview of the major project milestones which include: disseminating a survey, holding regular AFC Project Steering Committee meetings, releasing a monthly newsletter, conducting a community needs assessment and community consultations and developing an AFC framework. 7.2 Literature Review Emma Dickson from Public Interest conducted a literature review on various Age-Friendly Communities in Canada and details of these findings can be found in the attached presentation. 7.3 Engagement Strategies A discussion took place regarding engagement strategies and gaining buy-in from the public. An Engagement Strategy Framework detailing applicable groups and individuals to engage, geographical considerations, delivery methods (accessibility), and timelines will be provided at the next meeting for discussion. 7.5 Ethical Considerations A discussion took place regarding ethical considerations such as obtaining consent and maintaining confidentiality in the public engagement process. Ethics processes will be given consideration in each engagement strategy. The County of Simcoe has defined an ethics review process at the executive level. In addition, Georgian College is circulating the AFC Project Survey through the College’s Ethics Review Board.

Engagement Strategy Framework will be provided at the next meeting. Ethics processes to be discussed at next meeting.

8.0 NEXT STEPS

a) A revised Terms of Reference will be presented at the February meeting for Approval.

b) The Eight (8) Age-Friendly Community Dimensions will be discussed in greater detail at the next meeting.



c) The Age-Friendly Survey will be circulated by email for the Committee’s review.

d) An Engagement Strategy Framework will be provided at the next meeting.

Committee members to think about and provide suggestions at the next meeting on potential resources to engage.

e) Ethics processes will be discussed at the next meeting. NEXT MEETING: Michelle Denne to circulate a poll to identify the best meeting date.

ADJOURNMENT: 12:10 p.m.

1

Developing Age‐Friendly Communities: A World Health

Organization Initiative

By:Kevin D. Willison (Ph.D. – Community Health)

County of Simcoe PresentationJanuary 19, 2016

Your Presenter: Dr. Kevin D. Willison

Ph.D. (Community Health). (Division: Social and Behavioral Health Sciences). Faculty Of Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada).

Adjunct Assistant Professor –Queen’s University (Dept. of Rehabilitation Sciences).

Lecturer – Lakehead University (Orillia campus – Dept. of Interdisciplinary Studies).

What is ‘age‐friendly community’?

An age‐friendly community is onewhere policies, services andstructures related to the physicaland social environments aredesigned to support and enableolder people to live in a secureenvironment, enjoy good healthand, continue to participate fully intheir communities.

2

Physical environment: outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housingSocial environment: social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and

information community and health

services

8 Essential Dimensions of AFC

4

Source: County of Simcoe

Why is an age‐friendly community important?

• Adopting an age‐friendly approach means that a community will consider the needs of seniors in the development and implementation of local policies, programs and services.

• Source: County of Simcoe

5

Why is an age‐friendly community important?

• If priorities are not defined, communities with a high number of seniors will be at greater risk of: poorer health outcomes, augmented poverty levels, lacking sustainable housing, plus, accessibility and transportation needs will likely not be met.

Source: County of Simcoe

6

Note:

The topic of Developing and sustaining age-friendly communities is timely !

OUTREACH

Open Registration for Webinar on How Age-Friendly Communities Can Reduce Social Isolation

January 27, 2016, 1:00 - 2:30pm

Registration is now open for the webinar discussing How Age-FriendlyCommunities Can Reduce Social Isolation. This webinar is jointly hosted by thePublic Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Association on Gerontology.

The webinar is directed at seniors, researchers, policy makers, communityprogrammers and practitioners, health care professionals and caregivers with aninterest in Age-friendly communities and social isolation related to older people.

Visit CHNET-Works! for webinar details and registration.

8

How to promote / develop / sustain a focus on Age‐Friendly Communities?

9

10

Promote Knowledge Mobilization (KM)

• KM promotes the exchange of knowledge;

• KM facilitates productive communication;

• KM enhances knowledge access and encourages partnerships.

Focus on Community Development.

11

What is Community Development? Community development is positive

change in the community that improves both the welfare of community members and the

community’s ability to control its future

12

* CD involves community participation to help (for example) to effectively plan and implement initiatives and programs.

Community Development

13

Community Development (CD)

• CD entails a variety of citizen‐led efforts, carried out within or on behalf of a community, to define problems, develop solutions, and attract the resources necessary to implement activities that address the identified problems.

14

One way to do community development ?

15

Emphasize a Community BasedParticipatory Research (CBPR) Approach

16

17

CBPR

• Seeks to build community partnerships.• Focuses on the perceived needs of a given community.

• Seeks to improve client‐centered, holistic intervention.

• Requires community input / participation.• Seeks to meet actual community needs (by determining actual community needs)

18

“Participatory”

• Community members are provided opportunities to contribute their expertise and/or life experiences. Such information can help others (e.g. the “experts”) better understand individual and community needs / concerns.

19

Key

• When community knowledge is gained, such may be used for the benefit of a community involved (such as helping to identify gaps and/or shortcomings in existing resources and services).

Key Take Home Message

•Developing and sustaining age‐friendly communities is made more feasible where and when there is community engagement and collaboration.

20

Questions?

County of Simcoe1110 Highway 26, Midhurst, ON L0L 1X0


AGE-FRIENDLY COMMUNITY PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE

Terms of Reference

Age-Friendly Community Dimensions:

The World Health Organization framework for Age-Friendly Communities can be used to assess and enhance the age-friendliness of communities. The framework identifies eight (8) aspects of community life that overlap and interact to directly affect older adults, as such:

Goal To develop and seek Council endorsement of Simcoe County’s Age-Friendly Community Framework

Objectives To engage community members to assess how age-friendly Simcoe County

is, within the above eight domains and to determine age-friendly priorities. To develop a coordinated approach by engaging stakeholders to help define

the key principles for aging well within Simcoe County. To increase awareness in communities to help support healthy aging. To incorporate age-friendliness in our communities into the short and long-

range strategic planning process for the County of Simcoe. Mandated Membership The AFC project Steering Committee will be comprised of 20-30 members. Membership will include:

County of Simcoe Staff. 2 County of Simcoe Councillors appointed by Simcoe County Council. Representatives from senior-serving organizations. Representatives from disability-related organizations. Representatives from the local business community or Chamber of

Commerce.

Outdoor Spaces

Respect & Social Inclusion

Transportation Social Participation

Communication & Information

Housing

Civic Participation & Employment

Community Support &

Health Serv.

Individuals involved with one (1) or more of the eight (8) age-friendly domains.

Members of the public. Term Members of the committee shall serve from November 2015 to March 2017 (See County of Simcoe AFC Pathway for Milestones).

Mandate The committee is mandated to:

Provide strategic direction, planning and guidance in the undertaking of an assessment of the communities’ age-friendliness, including identification of:

- ways in which the communities are currently age friendly; - issues and barriers to age-friendliness that are present in the

communities; - opportunities to improve the age-friendliness of the communities; - gaps and ways in which current age-friendly assets and

initiatives can be expanded. Engage a diverse range of community residents/stakeholders to inform the

development of the age-friendly assessment. Disseminate the results of the assessment. Based on the results of the assessment develop a planning framework that

acts as a guide for municipalities in future development. Confirm project charter and monitor progress throughout the term. Anticipate and review project constraints and challenges and provide

suggestions for improvements and resolutions. Act as a forum and catalyst for community collaboration around the

objective(s) of making the communities more age-friendly. Promote the concept of age-friendly across the communities,

including the private, non-profit and public sectors. Engage members of the business community as key partners in making work

places and private sector services in the communities more age-friendly. Working Groups The committee has the authority to establish working groups as it deems necessary to fulfill designated functions consistent with the committee’s mandate. Meetings Meetings will be held monthly, with additional meetings held on an as needed basis, as determined by the Chair. Reporting The committee shall report through the Chair to the County Council.

Age‐friendly Initiative in Simcoe County

Presented to the Steering Committee January 19th, 2016

Project milestones

• Survey– Partnership with Georgian College students– Will be open end of January to mid‐March

• Project steering committee– Meeting monthly– Assists with feedback on data and information gathered– Assists with community outreach

• Communications– Monthly newsletter

2

Project milestones

• Community needs assessment– 10 key informants– Seniors’ roundtable– 13 focus groups

• Community consultations– 2 large‐scale consultations

• Preliminary and final framework report recommendations– Developed from data collected through engagement

3

Literature review

• Introduction• Age‐friendly projects

– Manitoba– Niagara– Ottawa– Quebec

• Rural outreach and strategies• First Nation, Métis and Inuit (FNMI) outreach and strategies• Newcomer outreach• Evaluation of age‐friendly strategies• Conclusion

4

Introduction

• Aging population– Last 10 years increase 12% aged 55+ (to 35%)

• Increasing accessibility is better for the whole community, not just seniors (i.e. ‘upstream’ policies)

• The experience of aging is diverse:– Location– Diversity– Gender– Migratory patterns 5

Age‐friendly projects

• WHO 8 dimensions of age‐friendly ‘city’

• Developed from study of 33 cities around the world

• Other projects structured using this format

6

Age‐friendly Manitoba

• Province‐wide initiative, with many local age‐friendly committees developing

• Opportunities from age‐friendly plan (Winnipeg)– Plans to change over a teen centre to a teen and senior center (i.e. a congregate meal program)

– Developed intergenerational booklet for school children– Installed automatic door at grocery stores, banks, senior drop‐in centre

– Added wheelchair‐accessible washroom on campground

Age‐friendly Steinbach

• Steinbach, Manitoba– Population of 13,000, 1 hr drive from Winnipeg– Survey and one focus group

• Main issues identified:– limited housing (and supportive housing)– transportation

• Some ideas were: – committee to meet with RCMP to discuss safety priorities– using space (like schools) for seniors programs – intergenerational programming

8

Age‐friendly Niagara

• Developed Age‐Friendly Resource Team for the region that provides ‘community coordinators’ to each community that would like to pursue an age‐friendly study– Help with consultations, awareness, application to WHO for recognition

– Partners with local businesses, services, volunteer agencies, etc.

• Age‐friendly initiative should be worked into each project (like AODA)

• Welland is recognized by WHO9

Age‐friendly Ottawa and Municipal Older Adult Plan• Two separate processes started in 2009:

– Council on Aging: 22 actions targeting the Community level (focus on continued community engagement)

– City of Ottawa: 74 actions focusing on Infrastructure– Focus on infrastructure and services

• Worked collaboratively on research and engagement– Secondary consultations conducted together– Submitted a joint application to WHO for AFC Status

10

Age‐friendly Planning in Quebec (2008‐2013)

11

• Provincial initiative spans 5 years, 3 stages– Year 1: Diagnostic and Action Planning– Years 2,3,4: Implementation of 7 pilot projects based on Plan and ongoing evaluation

– Year 5: Outcomes evaluation

• Focus on active aging (socialParticipation, safety and health)• Community building approach

Age‐friendly Planning in Quebec (2008‐2013)• Steering Committee Responsibilities

– Ensuring data collection processes are coherent, comprehensive and robust

– Considering strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of the project

– Assessing diagnostic report and identify priorities, implementation scenarios etc. for Action Plan

– Select appropriate methods for evaluation

12

Age‐friendly challenges

• Funding to support age‐friendly initiatives/financial sustainability

• Continued engagement of stakeholders (aging adults and private sector)

• Lack of capacity (serve on numerous age‐friendly related committees)

• High community expectation• Lack of direction and leadership from local government

13

Rural age‐friendly engagement

• Gap in WHO research• Those participating in the studies were usually already engaged in the community in some way

• There are less social services/agencies than in urban settings, therefore outreach should be to other places that seniors access (community centres, corner stores, radio, religious institutions)

• Seniors were provided with digital camera to take photos of their community

14

Rural age‐friendly context• Seniors have meaningfully different perceptions of the age‐

friendliness of their community in winter compared to the summer– Priorities for summer were focused on outside, such as cleanliness,

outside seating and green spaces– Priorities for winter focused on social inclusion, like indoor meeting

spaces and activities– In the winter, participants also felt that the onus was on them to

adapt their behaviour rather than advocate for safer built environments

• Safety concerns were related to accidents, like falling• Lack of public transportation meant people driving longer than they

want to

15

Rural age‐friendly strategies

• Walking program– Intergenerational activity that addresses concerns about walking safety

• Refresher driving course• Seniors dinners to celebrate local seniors achievements, addressing local respect

16

FNMI Age‐Friendly Study• Average response to the question ‘What age makes an Elder/Senior?” is 55

• 95% said they would not want to live directly in the homes of their children, with 45% open to the idea of a ‘nanny flat’

• Financial support, respite programs and in‐home training be provided for caregivers

• Urban aboriginal elders are at greater risk, with fewer supports and less knowledge of available services

17

FNMI Engagement• Important distinction, not all seniors are Elders.

• Protocols are followed at times for Elders (CAI, 2012)

• The term ‘Elder’ can mean many things to different people, take the time to learn (CAI, 2012)

• Invitations can be distributed (Lafontaine, 2008), or snowball method can be used (CAI, 2012)

18

FNMI Engagement cont’d

• Start early• Be sensitive to, and inclusive of, Indigenous methodologies • e.g. Sharing circles can be used in lieu of Focus Groups (Lavallée, 2009)

• Reciprocity is important, ensure you have something to offer participants (CAI, 2012)

• Language is important

19

FNMI Age‐Friendly StudySelect recommendations from Lafontaine, 2008 (NE LHIN)

• Assistance be provided to elders regarding the formation of elder/seniors’ advisory councils

• Elders are language keepers, ensure translation is available

• Home maintenance programs• Ensure jurisdictional boundaries are clear and services are available

20

Newcomer engagement strategies• Cultural safety

– Should be aware when holding community consultations, focus groups or other group related engagement sessions

• Lack of cultural knowledge – Learning different ways of doing things and being open to meet

cultural groups on their terms– ‘Cultural brokers’ – work with participants throughout initiative

• The need to understand what will motivate an individual to participate or engage – Connecting participants to services and programs that can improve

their quality of life (services can be for older adults, care providers or care givers)

21

Evaluation

• Important for longevity of age‐friendly action plan

• There are several tools available to conduct evaluation

• Should be looking at evaluation as you develop action plan

• Both examples concrete

22

Evaluating cont’d

• Many AFC initiatives are still in the implementation phase

• Age‐friendly Manitoba– Found increased age‐friendly promotion– Found increased “intersectoral partnerships that focused on building capacity and raise awareness about age‐friendly”

Feedback

• Questions?• Any other documents, initiatives or strategies that we should review to add to the written literature review?– Please fill out form included in your binder

24

Works citedBell, S., Novek, S. & Menec, V. (2013). Age‐friendly rural and remote communities and places: Report of the October 15‐17, 2012 international invited symposium.

Community‐University Research Alliance. (2010). Age‐friendly Steinbach community consultation summary. Age‐friendly Manitoba.

County of Simcoe. The Canadian population as a whole is aging: Are we prepared? County of Simcoe.

Council on Aboriginal Initiatives (CAI). (2012). Elder protocol and guidelines.

Dupuis‐Blanchard, S., Neufeld, A., & Strang, V. R. (2009). The significance of social engagement in relocated older adults. Qualitative Health Research, 19(9), 1186‐1195.

Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers Responsible for Seniors. (2006). Age‐friendly rural and remote communities: A guide. FPT Ministers.

Garvin, T. Nykiforuk, C. & Johnson, S. (2012) Can we get old here? Seniors’ perceptions of seasonal constraints of neighbourhood built environments in a northern winter city. Georgrafiska Annaler Series B, Human Geography, 94(4): pp. 369‐389.

Georgis, Rebecca, et al. "Creating Inclusive Parent Engagement Practices: Lessons Learned from a School Community Collaborative Supporting Newcomer Refugee Families."Multicultural Education 21.3/4 (2014): 23. Web.

Government of Ontario. (2014). Finding the right fit: Age‐friendly community planning. Government of Ontario.

25

Works citedLafontaine, A. (2008). Aboriginal/First Nations/Métis elder/seniors engagement: Aging at home Final report.

Lavalée, L. (2009). Practical application of an Indigenous research framework and two qualitative indigenous research methods.

McNeil, H., Elliott, J., & Stolee, P. (2014). Engaging older adults in health care research and policy: Guidelines from the CHOICE project. International Journal of Integrated Care, 14(9)

Menec, Verena H., et al. "Lessons Learned from a Canadian Province‐Wide Age‐Friendly Initiative: The Age‐Friendly Manitoba Initiative." Journal of Aging & Social Policy 26.1‐2 (2014): 33‐51. Web.

Neal, M. & Wernher, I. (2014) Evaluating your age‐friendly community program: A step‐by‐step guide. American Association of Retired Persons.

Ogilvie, L. D., Burgess‐Pinto, E., & Caufield, C. (2008). Challenges and approaches to newcomer health research. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 19(1), 64‐73. doi:10.1177/1043659607309142

Puxty, J. (2015). Age‐friendly communities: An introduction webinar. AFC Planning Outreach Initiative.

van der Velde, J., Williamson, D. L., & Ogilvie, L. D. (2009). Participatory action research: Practical strategies for actively engaging and maintaining participation in immigrant and refugee communities. Qualitative Health Research, 19(9), 1293‐1302.

World Health Organization: Global age‐friendly cities: A guide. World Health Organization.

26

Engagement outreach• Key informant interviews

– Local experts– Have a formed opinion on seniors issues in the community

• Seniors’ roundtable– Seniors committed and active in the community

• Focus groups– Each focus group has a target population

• Community consultations– Community members and stakeholders

27

minutes subject: meeting date: time: location: chair ... project steeri… · county of simcoe 1110...

Documents