Thanks for being a thoughtful contributor on our behalf, Dot. And thanks also for the great summary. It’s great to know that this process is underway and that community input is a priority.
Alameda County Public Health: Discussion on Health Outcomes in District 4
- By : Dot Theodore
- Category : Public Safety
- Tags: community engagement, economic development, mental health care, public education, public health, reduce violence
Public Safety
1
On Tuesday, July 29, I went to a discussion on health outcomes for Alameda County District 4. The goal of meeting was the accreditation of our county public health department with the Public Health Accreditation Board. This accreditation will provide guidance on project prioritization, leadership, and stakeholder engagement, as well as best practices for partnerships and collaborations. These guidelines and best practices are built on evidence-based research.
Alameda County Public Health director Dr. Muntu Davis gave an overview of the process towards accreditation. There is a requirement for community engagement. Community members are asked to identify factors that promote healthy communities. Finally, members are asked to identify top three priorities. These discussions will lead to a county health improvement plan, organizational plans for the department and then application for national accreditation.
These are my observations:
1. There is great health inequity in District 4. One of the first slides in the presentation show the difference in average life expectancy across our district, which runs from parts of Oakland to parts of Pleasanton. A 2013 publication by the county health department indicates a 7 year difference in life expectancy across Alameda County and a 5 year difference within District 4. That maps with race and income.
2. This was a community participatory process. Community members from all parts of District 4 were in attendance along with many health department staff. Castro Valley, Cherryland, Ashland and Oakland were represented by everyday citizens wanting to improve health outcomes in their community. Although the discussion was rich, I think better outreach needs to be done to reach more community members.
3. There are a lot of factors that influence the health of a community. We discussed what a healthy community looks like. Everything plus the kitchen sink contributes to healthy community: quality schools, reduced violence, mental health support, job opportunities, public transportation, greenhouse gas reductions, pedestrian/bicycle safety, open spaces, community gatherings, youth activities, etc. You name it, it affects community health.
4. Thinking about district wide priorities vs. your own local community priorities is challenging. Gun control and violence reduction was a high priority for community members in Oakland. Bike lanes and pedestrian safety were high for Castro Valley residents. Economic development was a high priority for Cherryland residents. After listening to each other’s discussions and arguments on how to prioritize factors affecting public health, we voted to identify our top three priorities.
The top three priorities for District 4 were: 1) increase mental health support for young children, 2) reduce violence and 3) emphasize economic development.
The next step is a county wide meeting in September. Each district will have community representatives presenting and discussing their group’s priorities. I will be one of the three community representatives for District 4.
The ultimate goal of this process is accreditation which will lead to quality improvements in our county’s public health department. Improved services, improved organization, and improved communication are the goals. I am looking forward to continued discussions and improvements to reach a greater state of health equity in Alameda County.
