Adding Years to Life, and Life to Years: A Case Study of Public Health’s Contribution to Healthy Aging in Oregon

Life expectancy at birth in the U.S. has doubled over the past one-and-a-half centuries jumping from 40 years in 1850 to 80 years in 2000. In 1950 approximately eight percent of the U.S. population (12 million people) was over 65 years of age. In 2015, that percent had almost doubled to 15 percent (45 million people). Today, Americans reaching the age of 65 can expect, on average, to live an additional 19 years.

Our country can significantly benefit from the contributions and experiences of older Americans, but we also must recognize and meet the challenges commensurate with the growing population of Americans 65 and older. All sectors should be engaged in promoting healthy aging, but public health – in particular – has a very distinct role to play to ensure that our older citizens experience a full life for as long as possible. After all, the public health sector has played a significant role in helping Americans to live longer, so we also have an important role to play to ensure those longer lives are full and productive.

What is Healthy Aging?

Healthy aging is defined as: 1) promoting health, preventing injury and managing chronic conditions; 2) optimizing physical, cognitive and mental health; and 3) facilitating social engagement. This definition intentionally does not equate healthy aging with the absence of disease and disability. Instead, it portrays healthy aging as both an adaptive process in response to the challenges that can occur as we age and a proactive process to reduce the likelihood, intensity, or impact of future challenges. It calls for maximizing physical, mental, emotional, and social wellbeing, while recognizing that aging often is accompanied by chronic illnesses and functional limitations, including lifelong conditions. While the public health sector has experience and skill in addressing these components of health for some populations, it has not traditionally focused such attention on older adults.

The Role of Public Health in Healthy Aging

Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), in partnership with The John A. Hartford Foundation, held
a convening called A Public Health Framework to Support the Improvement of the Health and
Wellbeing of Older Adults, in Tampa, Florida on October 27, 2017. National, state, and local
public health officials; aging experts, advocates, and service providers; and healthcare officials came together to discuss how public health could contribute to an age-friendly society and improve the health and wellbeing of older Americans. The result is a Framework for an Age-Friendly Public Health System that includes five potent roles for public health in the healthy
aging effort:

  1. Connecting and convening multiple sectors and professions that provide the
    supports, services, and infrastructure to promote healthy aging.
  2. Coordinating existing supports and services to avoid duplication of efforts, identify gaps, and increase access to services and supports.
  3. Collecting data to assess community health status (including inequities) and aging population needs to inform the development of interventions.
  4. Conducting, communicating, and disseminating research findings and best practices to support healthy aging.
  5. Complementing and supplementing existing supports and services, particularly in
    terms of integrating clinical and population health approaches.

The Framework outlines the functions that public health could fulfill, in collaboration with aging services, to address the challenges and opportunities of an aging society. Not every community will have the capacity to fulfill all these roles, and some roles are already being filled by other entities. Advancing the public health sector’s involvement in healthy aging needs to be guided by, and in partnership with, such organizations. Furthermore, public health organizations may lack sufficient capacity to undertake such activities and will need to carefully and thoughtfully determine how and where to focus their limited resources (e.g., braiding current streams of funding for public health activities). The emerging challenges associated with an aging population in the context of serious fiscal limitations within our communities means that we must find efficient models of supports and services that align with the framework’s approach. Oregon provides just such a model.

The Oregon Model

Oregon has taken a unique and cost-effective approach to addressing the needs and opportunities of its more than 660,000 people older than 65 years by co-locating the State Unit on Aging’s Long-Term Care Program Analyst (Program Analyst) within the Public Health Division offices. Although this was not always the case, this nontraditional co-location creates efficiencies, eliminates silos, and enhances coordination and collaboration between the two Oregon state agencies that provide health supports to Oregonians.

Like other states, Oregon’s public health and aging services are separate and distinct in funding, personnel, location, and services provided. The Department of Human Services State Unit on Aging (SUA) is responsible for overseeing implementation of the Older Americans Act,

Medicaid long-term care supports and services, Adult Protective Services (APS), and Oregon Project Independence. It works with the 17 Area Agencies on Aging which help to administer all the services and supports for older Oregonians. The Program Analyst works with Oregon’s aging services network to promote community implementation of evidence-based health promotion strategies addressing chronic disease self-management, falls prevention, physical activity and healthy eating, Alzheimer’s caregiving, and other preventive services.

Medicaid long-term care supports and services, Adult Protective Services (APS), and Oregon Project Independence. It works with the 17 Area Agencies on Aging which help to administer all the services and supports for older Oregonians. The Program Analyst works with Oregon’s aging services network to promote community implementation of evidence-based health promotion strategies addressing chronic disease self-management, falls prevention, physical activity and healthy eating, Alzheimer’s caregiving, and other preventive services.

Although Oregon’s public health division has not historically included healthy aging in its portfolio of programs, its Cross-Agency Systems Manager now devotes part of her time to healthy aging and collaborates frequently with the Program Analyst. The co-location in the public health division offices enhances opportunities for working together, limits redundancies, enables the sharing of key data, leverages funding between the divisions, and overall, helps to
create an age-friendly public health system in Oregon.

The Roles of the Program Analyst and Alignment with the Framework

When aligned with the five roles of public health within the Framework, the Oregon model provides an informative and, importantly, doable model for other public health systems across the country.

1. Connecting and convening

Healthy aging requires the active contribution of a variety of stakeholders. Indeed, many different organizations and professionals are working to support healthy aging and public health can help to connect and convene the multiple sectors and professions that provide the supports, services, policies and infrastructure to promote healthy aging.

Oregon’s Long-Term Care Program Analyst provides a link between the health department and the state’s 17 agencies on aging – a significant alignment as they are primarily responsible for providing information and services to seniors and people with disabilities across Oregon. Engaging public health with the agencies on aging provides a crucial connection between the two entities, particularly as local public health grantees are required to work with those agencies to ensure that seniors benefit from public health programs and services. The Program Analyst also facilitates partnerships with other statewide aging services, aging advocacy, and long-term care entities. These public-private partnerships are critical in addressing issues including the need for expanded respite services, the growing impact of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, and housing and transportation needs.

Oregon’s State Plan on Aging (developed every four years to guide SUA programs and activities) requires SUA staff to collaborate across programs and work to include positive approaches and practices across the elder services delivery networks. The Program Analyst supports these efforts by bringing the needs of older adults into this planning process.

2. Coordinating existing supports and services

Navigating the wide variety of supports and services for older adults can be confusing and overwhelming for older adults, their families, and other professionals. A second possible role for public health is therefore to coordinate existing supports and services to avoid duplication of efforts, identify gaps, increase access to services and supports, and ensure that older adults are not overlooked in any other public health programming or research.

Together health department staff and the Program Analyst help to ensure that programs run between the two agencies are complementary and not duplicative. They work closely with the Oregon Health Authority (Oregon’s single state Medicaid agency) regarding older adult mental and behavioral health and public health efforts impacting older adults. The Oregon Health Authority received state funding in 2015 to develop a statewide network of older adult behavioral health specialists. These individuals are working closely with elder services offices, community mental health agencies and others to develop closer coordination and support for older adults dealing with mental health needs. Oregon’s Program Analyst provides technical assistance to the area agencies on aging to aid in the implementation of the Older American’s Act and other federally-funded initiatives. Finally, the state public health division and Aging and People with Disabilities office partner on various initiatives to address chronic disease prevention and management, falls prevention, immunizations, and a new focus on oral health. iv

3. Collecting data

An important role of public health is to gather, analyze and disseminate demographic and health information. Such core public health activities can call attention to the needs and assets of a community’s aging population, inform the development of interventions and help set goals (and define measures) for health improvement. The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) administered by the CDC includes two modules that states have the option of using to assess and track two issues crucial to the health and well-being of older adults: the cognitive decline module and the caregiver module. The Oregon chapter of the Alzheimer’s Association encouraged the state legislature to fund these aging modules, making Oregon one of only seven states to collect data for both modules. Oregon utilizes additional BRFSS measures to cross walk multiple risk factors to better tune and align their efforts, such as the general physical and mental health indicators. In addition, Oregon created a healthy aging index in 2015 to prioritize and monitor key data indicators that inform investments in infrastructure to support health across the life span. Ensuring the use of public health data galvanizes partners toward common goals and objectives. And Oregon’s State Health Improvement Plan 2015-2019 identified oral health in older adults as a focus area for improvement and is using the BRFSS to track this data. The Program Analyst helps to oversee the collection and analysis of these data.

4. Conducting, communicating, disseminating research/best practices

Public health researchers, policymakers, and practitioners can play key roles in supporting healthy aging by conducting, communicating, and disseminating research findings and best practices to empower individuals to engage in healthy behaviors, support the provision of effective services, and contribute to the create of safe and healthy community environments. Indeed, there is a large body of research concerning healthy aging, yet limited clearinghouses for interested parties to find best practices or resources. Public health organizations could provide central locations for information on healthy aging, including best practices, toolkits, and research. The ready availability of such a site would enhance the capacity of other sectors and professions to address the needs of older adults.

Despite a lack of funding for communication, Oregon’s Public Health Division works with their aging partners to promote messaging directed toward older adults. Using the Public Health Division’s communication infrastructure to develop a story arc on Place Matters Oregon, the health department has been successful at accelerating and raising the civic conversation in Oregon. Place Matters Oregon now shares the lived experiences of older adults, reinforcing the importance of place and space on one’s ability to thrive as we age. Additionally, the department published the Health Within Reach Blog and Data Within Reach Webinar. This webinar outperformed all previous webinars and the Healthy Aging blog was the second most reviewed Health Within Reach blog post since it began; both demonstrating the opportunity and the need for public health to be informing conversations about aging in Oregon.

5. Complementing and supplementing existing supports

The fifth possible role for public health is complementing and supplementing existing supports and services, particularly in terms of integrating clinical and population health approaches. Existing public health programs address a wide range of health issues, from infectious disease to chronic disease; from education campaigns that reach the general public to targeted and focused home visits by educators; from the enforcement of environmental regulations addressing longterm health risks like clean air and water to the response to rare and catastrophic events. Furthermore, public health is focused on the entire life course, providing programs and policies such as maternal and child health, workplace safety, and tobacco-free initiatives, that ultimately support healthy aging later in life. Each of these current activities could be assessed to determine if they are adequately meeting the needs of older adults and, when not, modified to better do so.

In Oregon, as the aging sector works primarily at the individual level, the Cross Agency Systems Manager provides focus for the public health division and coordination with other statewide partners such as AARP and the Alzheimer’s Association on policy, systems and environmental change issues, such as tobacco policy, residential and in-home care settings, caregiving and worksite wellness policies, including paid sick leave and healthy meetings and events, agefriendly communities, and increasingly on dementia-friendly communities.

Conclusion

There are many ways for a public health department to become engaged in the promotion of the health and wellbeing of older adults. The current work in Oregon provides an innovative example particularly with the co-location of its Long-Term Care Program Analyst within its public health department. This approach enhances the state’s capacity to include healthy aging in its planning, data collection, communication, and program implementation. The Oregon model illustrates the potential for public health to effectively collaborate with the other sectors providing older adult services to promote optimal health.

Acknowledgements

TFAH wishes to acknowledge the contributions of Kirsten Aird, Cross Agency Systems Manager in Oregon’s Public Health Division, and Jennifer Mead, Program Analyst in the Oregon Department of Human Services State Unit on Aging, to make this case study possible. We are grateful for their expertise and commitment to ensure the effective collaboration between Oregon’s public health and aging services sectors.

Half of States Scored 5 or Lower Out of 10 Indicators in Report on Health Emergency Preparedness

Report Finds Funding to Support Base Level of Preparedness Cut More than Half Since 2002

 

Washington, D.C., December 19, 2017 – In Ready or Not? Protecting the Public’s Health from Diseases, Disasters and Bioterrorism, 25 states scored a 5 or lower on 10 key indicators of public health preparedness. Alaska scored lowest at 2 out of 10, and Massachusetts and Rhode Island scored the highest at 9 out of 10.

The report, issued today by the Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), found the country does not invest enough to maintain strong, basic core capabilities for health security readiness and, instead, is in a continued state of inefficiently reacting with federal emergency supplemental funding packages each time a disaster strikes.

According to Ready or Not?, federal funding to support the base level of preparedness has been cut by more than half since 2002, which has eroded advancements and reduced the country’s capabilities.

“While we’ve seen great public health preparedness advances, often at the state and community level, progress is continually stilted, halted and uneven,” said John Auerbach, president and CEO of TFAH.  “As a nation, we—year after year—fail to fully support public health and preparedness. If we don’t improve our baseline funding and capabilities, we’ll continue to be caught completely off-guard when hurricanes, wildfires and infectious disease outbreaks hit.”

Ready or Not? features six expert commentaries from public health officials who share perspectives on and experiences from the historic hurricanes, wildfires and other events of 2017, including from California, Florida, Louisiana and Texas.

The report also examines the nation’s ability to respond to public health emergencies, tracks progress and vulnerabilities, and includes a review of state and federal public health preparedness policies. Some key findings include:

  • Just 19 states and Washington, D.C. increased or maintained funding for public health from Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-2016 to FY 2016-2017.
  • The primary source for state and local preparedness for health emergencies has been cut by about one-third (from $940 million in FY 2002 to $667 million in FY 2017) and hospital emergency preparedness funds have been cut in half ($514 million in FY 2003 to $254 million in FY 2017).
  • In 20 states and Washington, D.C. 70 percent or more of hospitals reported meeting Antibiotic Stewardship Program core elements in 2016.
  • Just 20 states vaccinated at least half of their population (ages 6 months and older) for the seasonal flu from Fall 2016 to Spring 2017—and no state was above 56 percent.
  • 47 state labs and Washington, D.C. provided biosafety training and/or provided information about biosafety training courses (July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017).

The Ready or Not? report provides a series of recommendations that address many of the major gaps in emergency health preparedness, including:

  • Communities should maintain a key set of foundational capabilities and focus on performance outcomes in exchange for increased flexibility and reduced bureaucracy.
  • Ensuring stable, sufficient health emergency preparedness funding to maintain a standing set of core capabilities so they are ready when needed. In addition, a complementary Public Health Emergency Fund is needed to provide immediate surge funding for specific action for major emerging threats.
  • Strengthening and maintaining consistent support for global health security as an effective strategy for preventing and controlling health crises. Germs know no borders.
  • Innovating and modernizing infrastructure needs – including a more focused investment strategy to support science and technology upgrades that leverage recent breakthroughs and hold the promise of transforming the nation’s ability to promptly detect and contain disease outbreaks and respond to other health emergencies.
  • Recruiting and training a next generation public health workforce with expert scientific abilities to harness and use technological advances along with critical thinking and management skills to serve as Chief Health Strategist for a community.
  • Reconsidering health system preparedness for new threats and mass outbreaks.  Develop stronger coalitions and partnerships among providers, hospitals and healthcare facilities, insurance providers, pharmaceutical and health equipment businesses, emergency management and public health agencies.
  • Preventing the negative health consequences of climate change and weather-related threats. It is essential to build the capacity to anticipate, plan for and respond to climate-related events.
  • Prioritizing efforts to address one of the most serious threats to human health by expanding efforts to stop superbugs and antibiotic resistance. 
  • Improving rates of vaccinations for children and adults – which are one of the most effective public health tools against many infectious diseases.
  • Supporting a culture of resilience so all communities are better prepared to cope with and recover from emergencies, particularly focusing on those who are most vulnerable.   Sometimes the aftermath of an emergency situation may be more harmful than the initial event.  This must also include support for local organizations and small businesses to prepare for and to respond to emergencies.

The report was supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).

Score Summary: 

A full list of all of the indicators and scores and the full report are available on TFAH’s website.  For the state-by-state scoring, states received one point for achieving an indicator or zero points if they did not achieve the indicator.  Zero is the lowest possible overall score, 10 is the highest.  The data for the indicators are from publicly available sources or were provided from public officials.

9 out of 10: Massachusetts and Rhode Island

8 out of 10: Delaware, North Carolina and Virginia

7 out of 10: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, New York, Oregon and Washington

6 out of 10: California, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont and West Virginia

5 out of 10: Georgia, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Montana and Tennessee

4 out of 10: Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania

3 out of 10: Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming

2 out of 10: Alaska

 Trust for America’s Health is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to saving lives by protecting the health of every community and working to make disease prevention a national priority.

 ###

Total Health at Kaiser Permanente

Total Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being. In 2013, Kaiser Permanente launched Total Health to help Kaiser Permanent members and workforce, their families, and communities achieve this vision of health. By focusing on chronic conditions driven by modifiable social and environmental determinants of health, Kaiser Permanente Total Health works to benefit communities through a variety of programs including: Thriving Schools initiative (300 schools participate) which aims to create a culture of wellness in schools including healthy meals; Every Body Walk! which raises awareness about the benefits of walking; and an incentive plan for the Kaiser Permanente workforce to improve health metrics. Partners include safety-net providers, fresh food providers, theatres, and grassroots organizations, in addition to schools and school-related organizations. Kaiser Permanente funds $2 billion that is needed annually for this population health work and supplemental funding is provided by partner organizations. To read more about this innovative program, see this brief summary [link].

Health Resilience Program™ of CareOregon

CareOregon has developed a new model of Community-Oriented Primary Care that travels beyond the four walls of the medical office practice. The initiative “takes health to the people” reaching into the community where the city’s most vulnerable residents live. Care is provided by Health Resilience Specialists (HRS) who are master’s level ‘engagement specialists’ tasked with developing meaningful partnerships with a panel of high-acuity/high-cost patients to enable wellness and stability in their lives. This approach not only reduces the total cost of care but enhances patient experience and outcomes. CareOregon’s six programmatic principles of trauma-informed care include: reducing barriers; providing client-centered care; increasing transparency; taking time and building trust; avoiding judgement and labels; and providing care in a community-based setting. CareOregon receives its funding from public programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. To read more about this innovative program, see this brief summary [link].

Improving the Health of Communities by Increasing Access to Affordable, Locally Grown Foods

BY MICHEL NISCHAN, CEO and Founder, Wholesome Wave

When my son was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, I became painfully aware of the direct connection between food and health. As a chef, this realization caused me to transform the way I fed my family and customers. Fresh, nutrient-dense, locally grown foods became the foundation for the type of diet that would give my son and restaurant guests the best long-term health.

Quickly, though, I recognized that not every family can afford to purchase healthy foods. As a result, I founded Wholesome Wave in 2007.

Wholesome Wave is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to making healthy, locally and regionally grown food affordable to everyone, regardless of income. We work collaboratively with underserved communities, nonprofits, farmers, farmers’ markets, healthcare providers, and government entities to form networks that improve health, increase fruit and vegetable consumption and generate revenue for small and mid-sized farms.

Double Value Coupon Program

In 2008, we launched the Double Value Coupon Program (DVCP), a network of more than 50 nutrition incentive programs operated at 305 farmers markets in 24 states and DC. The program provides customers with a monetary incentive when they spend their federal nutrition benefits at participating farmers markets. The incentive matches the amount spent and can be used to purchase healthy, fresh, locally grown fruits and vegetables.

Farmers and farmers’ markets benefit from this approach, and have been key allies as we work towards federal and local policy change.  In 2013, federal nutrition benefits and DVCP incentives accounted for $2.45 million in sales at farmers’ markets.

Communities also see an increase in economic activity.  The $2.45 million spent at local farmers’ markets creates a significant ripple effect. In addition to the dollars spent at markets, almost one-third of DVCP consumers said they planned to spend an average of nearly $30 at nearby businesses on market day, resulting in more than $1 million spent at local businesses. We also see that the demographics of market participants are more diverse – our approach breaks down social barriers and allows consumers who receive federal benefits to be seen as critical participants in local economies.

Equally as important, people are eating healthier. Our 2011 Diet and Behavior Shopping Study indicated 90 percent of DVCP consumers increased or greatly increased their consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables – a behavior change that continues well after market season ends.

Today, the program reaches more than 35,800 participants and their families and impacts more than 3,500 farmers. Combined with the new Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentives Program in the latest Farm Bill, this approach is now being scaled up with $100 million allocated for nutrition incentives over five years.

Fruit and Vegetable Prescription Program

We developed the Fruit and Vegetable Prescription Program (FVRx) to measure health outcomes linked to fruit and vegetable consumption. The four to six month program is designed to provide assistance to overweight and obese children who are affected by diet-related diseases such as type 2 diabetes. In 2013, the program impacted 1,288 children and adults in 5 states and DC. Nearly two-thirds of the participants are enrolled in SNAP and roughly a quarter receive WIC benefits.

The model works within the normal doctor-patient relationship.  During the visit, the doctor writes a prescription for produce that the patient’s family can redeem at participating farmers’ markets. The prescription includes at least one serving of produce per day for each patient and each family member – i.e., a family of four would receive $28 per week to spend on produce. In addition to the prescription, there are follow-up monthly meetings with the practitioner and a nutritionist to provide guidance and support for healthy eating, and to measure fruit and vegetable consumption.  Other medical follow-ups are performed, including tracking body mass index (BMI).

FVRx improves the health of participants. Forty-two percent of child participants saw a decrease in their BMI and 55 percent of participants increased their fruit and vegetable consumption by an average of two cups. In addition, families reported a significant increase in household food security.

Each dollar invested in the program provides healthier foods for participants, boosts income for small and mid-sized farms and supports the overall health of the community. As with the DVCP, there are benefits for producers and communities.  In 2012 alone, FVRx brought in $120,000 in additional revenue for the 26 participating markets.

In less than seven years, Wholesome Wave has extended its reach to 25 states and DC and is working with more than 60 community-based organizations, community healthcare centers in six states, two hospital systems, and many others. Our work proves that increasing access to affordable healthy food is a powerful social equalizer, health improver, economic driver and community builder.

Wholesome Wave is working to change the world we eat in. As the number of on-the-ground partners increases, we get closer to a more equitable food system for everyone.  This means healthier citizens and communities, and a more vibrant economy nationwide.