1 / 64

Hennepin County Aging Initiative

Hennepin County Aging Initiative. Using research to plan for an aging population. Hennepin County: Percent of 2010 residents by age group Total population = 1,152,425. Age 20-44: 36% . 45 and Older: 38%. 10.0. Age: 0-19: 25% . Baby Boomers: 25%. 8.8. 9.0. 8.0. 7.5. 7.5. 7.4. 7.3.

clea
Download Presentation

Hennepin County Aging Initiative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hennepin County Aging Initiative Using research to plan for an aging population

  2. Hennepin County: Percent of 2010residents by age groupTotal population = 1,152,425 Age 20-44: 36% 45 and Older: 38% 10.0 Age: 0-19: 25% Baby Boomers: 25% 8.8 9.0 8.0 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.3 6.6 6.8 6.6 7.0 6.5 6.3 6.3 6.0 6.0 5.1 5.0 4.0 3.4 Baby Boomers:25% 3.0 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.0 0.0 0-4 5-9 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Files.

  3. Net Change in the Population of Hennepin County From 2010 to 2020

  4. Hennepin County 1990-2040: Comparing 0-9 Year Olds and 65 and Older Data Source: Population Actuals and Projections (Minnesota State Demographic Center downloaded 1/4/2012); 1990-2009 data drawn from Missouri Census Data Center Population Estimates by Age. http://mcdc.missouri.edu/websas/estimates_by_age.shtml; downloaded October 2010.

  5. Percent of Population Age 45 and Older in Hennepin County Cities

  6. Childless couples and 1-person households projected to grow Most Minnesota Household Growth 2010-20 Will Be Older Empty Nester and Older Living Alone By 2020, Older Empty Nesters will be the Largest Family Type Source: Minnesota State Demographic Center

  7. Hennepin County Percent of Boomers and Older Adults with Disabilities: SHAPE 2010 Survey Chart source: Hennepin County Research Planning and Development Data source: Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department. SHAPE 2010, Survey of the Health of All the Population and the Environment, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

  8. Obesity = Body Mass Index (BMI) of30 or more • Body Mass Index (BMI): A measure of an adult’s weight in relation to his or her height, specifically the adult’s weight in kilograms divided by the square of his or her height in meters. • If you are a 6’ male, you would be obese at 225 lbs • If you are a 5’7” woman, you would be obese at 195 lbs

  9. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1985 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  10. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1986 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  11. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1987 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  12. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1988 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  13. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1989 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  14. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1990 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  15. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1991 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  16. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1992 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  17. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1993 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  18. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1994 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  19. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1995 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  20. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1996 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  21. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1997 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24%

  22. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1998 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24%

  23. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1999 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24%

  24. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2000 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24%

  25. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2001 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29%

  26. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2002 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29%

  27. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2003 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29%

  28. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2004 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29%

  29. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2005 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  30. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2006 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  31. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2007 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  32. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2008 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  33. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2009 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  34. Obesity Trends: U.S. adults

  35. Hennepin County Population 45+ years old

  36. Hennepin County Population 45+ years old * Diabetes or sugar disease; heart attack, angina, stroke; hypertension or high blood pressure; high blood cholesterol

  37. Hennepin County Population 45+ years old

  38. Hennepin County Population 45+ years old

  39. Ifthe proportion of Hennepin County residents 65+ with ADL or IADL remains constant*… That’s up 98% from 2010 * Assumes that the proportion of the Hennepin County population age 65+ with disabilities remains constant over the years of the projections. Chart source: Hennepin County Research Planning and Development Data source: Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department. SHAPE 2010, Survey of the Health of All the Population and the Environment, Minneapolis, Minnesota and the Minnesota State Demographic Center Minnesota Population Projections by age, sex and county, 2015-2040, downloaded October 2012

  40. Active Living Hennepin County • Elected officials • Multidisciplinary and multi-organizational partnership • Methods, challenges and revisions • Funding: Blue Cross and Blue Shield, MN Dept. of Health, Pew Charitable Trusts, CDC, NACCHO

  41. Active Living Hennepin County Active Living Hennepin County is guided by a partnership that includes Hennepin County and the following cities and organizations: City of Bloomington City of Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Park City of Crystal City of Excelsior City of Golden Valley City of Hopkins City of Independence City of Maple Plain City of Minnetonka City of Minneapolis City of New Hope City of Robbinsdale City of St. Louis Park McGough Companies Metropolitan Council MnDOT Three Rivers Park District Transit for Livable Communities

  42. Active Living Highlights • November 2006 – Walking workshop in the City of Hopkins led by Mark Fenton • March 2009 – Winter walking workshop in the City of St. Louis Park let by Mark Fenton • October 2009 – Bicycle workshop in the City of Robbinsdale co-hosted by Active Living Hennepin County and the Minneapolis Bike-Walk Ambassadors • Fall 2011 – Funded 67 bike racks and 11 benches at key locations in partner communities such as trail heads, retail stores, and parks to facilitate active living • May 2013 – Hopkins became the 6th city in Hennepin County to adopt a local Complete Streets policy, joining Bloomington, Independence, Maple Plain, New Hope, and Richfield

  43. Boomer attitudes They want to age in place and believe they will

  44. Aging in place • In Minnesota, just 12.7% of 50-59 year olds expect to move in the next few years • Nationally, 75% of older Boomers plan to remain in their home in retirement Source: Minnesota Board on Aging, 2005 Survey of Older Minnesotans, Metlife Mature Market Institute. (February 2009). Boomer Bookends: Insights into the oldest and youngest boomers.Retrieved from: https://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/mmi-boomer-bookends.pdf

  45. Challenges to aging in place • Health conditions • Housing structure • Financial concerns

  46. Older adult perspectives: quotations from the focus groups “Our house is not conducive to aging well. We’ve got stairs and so for my Mom we had to do major renovation to the bathroom that’s next to her bedroom. And so as we age we probably need to find a place that’s, like, all on one level, you know, and has handicap accessibility,…just in case we’re no longer able to move like we move now.” “15 years ago we were like, ‘Yes, I am going to retire. I’m going to have my house.’ And now we’re all sitting here saying can we even afford our house one year to the next?...I look at my property taxes, I look at my electricity bill, I look at the city taxes, the county taxes, the state taxes.” “It is a problem. I have stairs. And it is hard to get in and out of the tub with my knee.”

  47. An assumption about older adult mobility And finally, unable to walk, they use special transit services They first lose the ability to drive They then use public transit, if it is available When unable to use public transit, they walk The Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. (2003, July). The Mobility Needs of Older Americans: Implications for Transportation Reauthorization (Transportation Reform Series). Washington, DC: Sandra Rosenbloom. Photo credit: Metropolitan Council, Metro Mobility

  48. Taxis seldom used 4 to 9 percent of all trips 65+ 1 to 2 percent of all trips 65+ About 90 percent of all trips 65+ There will be more older adults and they will be driving to their destinations Data sources: Granda, T.M., & Thompson, S. (2006). The older driver comes of age. Public Roads, 69(4), 1-13. Surface Transportation Policy Project. (2004, April). Aging Americans: Stranded without options. Washington, DC: Linda Bailey.; Dumbaugh, E. (2008). Designing communities to enhance the safety and mobility of older adults: A universal approach. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(1), 17-36.; Rosenbloom, S. (2009). Meeting transportation needs in an aging-friendly community. Generations: Journal of the American Society on Aging, 33(2), 33-43.; International City/County Management Association. (2003, September). Active living for older adults: Management strategies for healthy and livable communities. Retrieved June 10, 2010 from http://bookstore.icma.org, item no. E-43140.

  49. Older adults in the Twin Cities also make a majority of their trips by car Chart source: Hennepin County Research, Planning and Development Data source: Metropolitan Council Twin Cities Travel Behavior Inventory, 2000, N=58,342

  50. Older adult perspectives: quotations from the focus groups “Well personally I think it would be like a win, win situation to make available for most elderly to stay in their homes…Then it would be less money spent on health care, facilities, all that kind of stuff...” “I think supporting infrastructure for livability, of neighbors, to help people to age in place if they desire to, and then a menu of services that help that happen.”

More Related