Collaborative Data Collection, Analysis, and Dissemination

1. Collaborative Data Collection, Analysis, and Dissemination June 26, 2013 Sandra J Winter, PhD, MHA Jylana L Sheats, PhD, MPH Dominique Cohen, MA, MFTI Stanford Prevention Research Center Stanford University School of Medicine

2. Overview • Icebreaker • Introductions • Us • You • Background to our project • Learning Objectives - working collaboratively to: • Collect data • Analyze data • Disseminate project results • Success: strategies and measures • Interactive section • Problem solving strategies • Challenges and Benefits • Lessons learned • Concluding thoughts

3. ICEBREAKER

4. Run around the table if……… • You did some type of physical activity in the past week • You came here using public transport • You have eaten fruits AND vegetables today • You had sufficient sleep last night

5. Introductions

6. Us • Sandra J Winter, PhD, MHA • Jylana L Sheats, PhD, MPH • Dominique Cohen, MA, MFTI

7. You • Name • Your Organization • Your CBPR experience • What you hope to accomplish at this session

8. Background

9. Neighborhood Eating and Activity Advocacy Team (NEAAT) • Build capacity for change through community partnerships • Train seniors to be advocates for improved neighborhood designs that promote health • Disseminate findings to policy makers

10. Community-Based Participatory Research San Mateo County -health; aging; transportation; housing Housing coalitions -MidPen Housing Corp Other community organizations SPRC Housing management and residents -Housing Site A (EPA), - Housing Site B (Daly City) Funding Agency - Office of Community Health, Stanford University

11. NEAAT Process • Initial Study Period • August 2010 – May 2011 • Formed Community Advocacy Teams (CAT) • CAT members: • Identified neighborhood features • Prioritized issues to tackle • Adopted a solution-oriented approach

12. Setting • Two affordable senior housing sites, San Mateo Co • Housing Site A (74 units) - primarily African American • Housing Site B (77 units) - primarily Filipino • Managed by MidPen Housing Corporation

13. NEAAT CAT Demographics

14. Learning Objectives

15. Learning Objectives • Describe different strategies guiding collaboration in data collection • Describe different strategies for collaborative data analysis • Describe different approaches to collaborative dissemination of project results

16. Overview:Collaborative Data Collection • Types of Data Gathered by CAT members: • Assessment of neighborhood built environment • Assessment of neighborhood food environment • Surveys of residents of housing sites • Pedestrian and vehicle street counts

17. Collaborative Data Collection (4 total): #1: Assessment of Neighborhood Built Environment • Used mobile phones, hand held audio recorders and pen and paper notes • Led to the development of the Stanford Healthy Neighborhood Discovery Tool

18. Collaborative Data Collection:#2: Assessment of Neighborhood Food Environment • Perception that local stores did not stock fruits and vegetables • Conducted a survey of fruits and vegetables available in local stores • Based on a well validated research tool – the Nutritional Environmental Measures Survey (NEMS)

19. CollaborativeData Collection:#3: Surveys of Other Residents • How many times a week do you cross this street? • At what time of day do you usually cross this street? • What are the main reasons you cross this street?

20. Collaborative Data Collection:#4: Street counts • Partnered with a youth organization • Counted vehicle and pedestrian traffic • Different times of the day

21. Overview:Strategies for Collaborative Data Analysis • Reviewing the data • Collective problem identification • Prioritizing the issues

22. Collaborative Data Analysis • Participants met to review all the data gathered • Wrote all issues noted on big post-itnotes • Gave people stickers to vote on the issues they thought were most important

23. Collaborative Data Analysis • Prioritized issues to address using the feasibility and importance table

24. Example Issue Identified and Actions Taken • Unsafe to cross busy streets • Actions taken: • Surveyed residents about street use • Counted pedestrian and vehicle traffic – either themselves or in partnership with a local youth group • Got letter of support from local businesses • Engaged in dialogue with local city planners

25. Example Issue Identified and Actions Taken • Limited access to fresh produce • Actions taken: • Reinvigorated a neglected backyard garden • Obtained “Fresh Checks” for local Farmers Market • Held cooking classes • Raised awareness of available fresh produce • Held “potluck” dinners to promote healthy eating

26. Overview:Collaborative Dissemination of Project Results • Community meeting • Media coverage of the NEAAT project • Dialogue with policy makers

27. Community Meeting • Hosted by the San Mateo County Health System • Attended by representatives from • Stanford University • various non profit organization • various healthcare systems • Residents from each housing site presented • 3 collectively identified issues • their solution oriented approach

28. Media Coverage • Article about the NEAAT project produced by Spectrum and available on-line and in print in Inside Stanford Medicine • Video produced by Spectrum available on YouTube • http://med.stanford.edu/ism/2011/august/runnymede.html

29. Meetings with Policy Makers • Initial and ongoing dialogue with various City Planners Brent Butler, AICP, CFM City Planner for East Palo Alto Meeting with residents

30. Success

31. Strategies for Success • Enlist a “Champion for Change” • Develop community capacity and skills • Foster community ownership of projects • Build strong relationships • Engage with policy makers • Actively pursue sustainability • Set realistic expectations for all

32. Measuring Success Short-Term: Long-Term: On-going use of advocacy skills Partnerships sustained Continued dialogue with policy makers Allocation of government $ to update the general plan so that public health is targeted in future planning • Residents learned advocacy skills • Partnerships developed • Initial engagement with policy makers • Allocation of government $ to tree planting, sidewalk improvements etc

33. Interactive Section

34. Now it’s your turn …… In small groups discuss your CBPR projects • What challenges have you experienced? • What problem solving strategies did you employ? • What lessons did you learn? • What benefits does a CBPR approach offer?

35. Conclusions • Data gathering • Develop partnerships at different levels • Gather data from various sources using mixed methods • Data analysis • Use simple decision making paradigms • Don’t underestimate community capabilities • Data dissemination • Harness communication skills of community members • Use multiple methods (on-line, print, social media, etc)

36. Acknowledgements • Abby C King, PhD • Matt Buman, PhD • Brent Butler, AICP, CFM • Dominique Cohen, MA, MFTI • Kevin Pieritti • Cathleen Baker, MPP • Rhonda McClinton Brown, MPH • Jill Evans, MPH

37. Project Funding • Principal Investigator: Abby C King, PhD • Funded by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH, through UL1 RR025744 • Awarded through the Office of Community Health, Stanford University School of Medicine.

38. Thank you