110 likes | 254 Views
Komen Tri-Cities Grant Training December 3, 2012. Introductions . Curt Rose, Board President Cheryl Youland , Executive Director Megan Quinn, Grants Chair quinnm@etsu.edu Ginger Keller-Ferguson, Grant Writer ginger@keller-ferguson.com Katie Skelton, Mission Coordinator
E N D
Introductions • Curt Rose, Board President • Cheryl Youland, Executive Director • Megan Quinn, Grants Chair • quinnm@etsu.edu • Ginger Keller-Ferguson, Grant Writer • ginger@keller-ferguson.com • Katie Skelton, Mission Coordinator • missioncoordinator@komentricities.org
Komen History Established in 1982 by Nancy Brinker to honor the memory of her sister, Susan G. Komen who died of breast cancer at 36. World’s largest, most progressive grassroots network of breast cancer survivors/activists. $1 Billion – world’s largest source of non-profit funds to fight breast cancer.
Affiliate History Established in 2005 due to cooperative efforts between Wellmont & Mountain State Health Alliance. $1.79 million to local grantees, ~$500 thousand to research. Objective to provide maximum return to support Komen’s mission to save lives & end breast cancer forever through education, screening, & research. 23 counties & 2 communities; tri-state area.
Community Profile • Purpose: Serves as a periodic examination of the breast health needs and gaps in our service region. • Directs the allocation of grants, operating, and volunteer resources to best meet the evolving needs of the community. • Find it here: • http://www.komentricities.org/assets/grants-documents/community-profile-2011.pdf
Statistics • KTC’s breast cancer rates: • Incidence rates LOWER than national & state rates. • Mortality rates HIGHER than national & state rates. • Rate of women w/o health insurance in KTC region HIGHER than other parts of TN, NC, VA and national rates. • Mammography screening rates LOWER than state and national rates. • All 25 counties Distressed, At-Risk, Transitional • African American community has higher mortality rate, later diagnosis.
Community Data – How We Got It Each state shows a different portfolio of services. Counties were divided by state, evidence of “ruralness,” subdivided into “rural” and “more populated.” Focus group methodology, roundtable discussions to dig deep into breast health needs of the communities. Barriers were far from one-dimensional/simple
Overall Findings • Overall conclusions: • Region’s screening rates are TOO LOW • Barriers are multi-dimensional & vary by communities • Barriers are heavily influenced by families, cultural attitudes, tight social networks • We believe that if we can move women to have their screening mammograms then lives can be saved. • Must reach out in relevant ways & build relationships.
Affiliate Priorities (Page 6 in CP) Providing culturally relevant education and awareness. Building grassroots mobilization in communities. Mitigating risk factors. Empowering survivorship. Addressing the need for low/no-cost screening. Increasing awareness initiatives for physician offices. Addressing access issues in remote regions. Overcoming fear by incorporating entertainment.
Affiliate Priorities (Page 6 in CP) Incorporating social, religious or other culturally relevant elements into screening recruitment initiatives. Capitalizing on family and social network “peer” pressure to encourage women to seek screenings. Addressing familial history variables to overcome unsubstantiated concerns. Every initiative should have a key objective of raising breast health awareness and improving the quality of women’s lives before, during and/or after encountering breast health issues.
Questions ?? • Megan Quinn, Grants Chair • 615-838-7175 • quinnm@etsu.edu • Katie Skelton, Mission Coordinator • 423-765-9313 • missioncoordinator@komentricities.org