DOCSLIB.ORG

Border Health Equity Transportation Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Border Health Equity Transportation Study Border Health Equity Transportation Study A Case Study of the San Ysidro Community Final Report February 27, 2015 Prepared for: San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Prepared by: 239 Laurel Street, Suite 203 San Diego, CA 92101 In association with: Funded by the Caltrans Environmental Justice Planning Grant Program Acknowledgements Many individuals aided in the preparation of materials contained in this Final Report. In particular, the cooperation and involvement of various SANDAG committees and working groups, the City of San Diego, Caltrans, and the community of San Ysidro are acknowledged. A special thanks to Dr. Jordan Carlson of UC San Diego's Department of Family and Preventative Medicine for assistance with statistical analysis. SANDAG Committees and Working Groups Border Health Equity Transportation Study Stakeholder Working Group Regional Planning Committee Borders Committee Committee on Binational Regional Opportunities Regional Planning Technical Working Group Public Health Stakeholder Group Community-Based Organizations Casa Familiar Caltrans Staff Connery Cepeda, Associate Transportation Planner Michael Kent, Associate Transportation Planner SANDAG Staff Dan Gallagher, Senior Regional Planner Sarah Strand, Regional Planner Coleen Clementson, Principal Regional Planner Elisa Arias, Principal Regional Planner Rachel Kennedy, Senior Regional Planner Laurie Gartrell, Regional Planner Hector Vanegas, Borders Program Manager Consultant Team Chen Ryan Associates Sherry Ryan, PhD Andrew Prescott Sasha Jovanovic Human Impact Partners Marnie Purciel-Hill Casa Familiar David Flores Border Health Equity Transportation Study i Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Analysis Framework ......................................................................................................... 8 1.3 The San Ysidro Community .............................................................................................. 9 1.3.1 Historical Context .................................................................................................... 9 1.3.2 San Ysidro’s Proximity to the International Border .................................................... 9 1.3.3 Planning Area ............................................................................................................10 1.4 Public Participation..........................................................................................................13 1.4.1 Community Workshops ..........................................................................................13 1.4.2 Stakeholder Group .................................................................................................13 1.5 Organization of the Report..............................................................................................15 2.0 Identification of San Ysidro Mobility/Built Environment and Health Issues ...............16 2.1 Previous San Ysidro Studies and Plans ..............................................................................16 2.2 Community Workshop ....................................................................................................19 2.3 Synthesis of Health and Mobility/Built Environment Issues ................................................21 3.0 Previous Research on Mobility/Built Environment and Health ....................................25 3.1 Transportation Systems, Land Use, and Mobility ...............................................................25 3.2 Travel Mode Choice ........................................................................................................25 3.2.1 Walking and Cycling ..............................................................................................26 3.2.2 Public Transportation..............................................................................................27 3.2.3 Driving ...................................................................................................................28 3.3 Livability, Convenience, and Safety ..................................................................................35 3.3.1 Livability.................................................................................................................35 3.3.2 Convenience ..........................................................................................................36 3.3.3 Safety ....................................................................................................................37 3.4 Access to Resources ........................................................................................................38 3.4.1 Employment ..........................................................................................................39 3.4.2 Childcare Centers, Public Schools, and Public Libraries .............................................40 3.4.3 Parks, Community Centers, and Community Gardens..............................................40 3.4.4 Post Offices, Banks, and Pharmacies .......................................................................41 3.4.5 Food Retail .............................................................................................................41 3.4.6 Health Care Facilities ..............................................................................................42 3.5 Shaping Communities .....................................................................................................42 4.0 Methodology ..................................................................................................................44 4.1 Healthy Communities Atlas (SANDAG) ............................................................................44 4.2 Community Health Statistics (County Health And Human Services Agency) .......................46 4.3 Comparing San Ysidro, the City of San Diego and the Region ..........................................48 4.4 Partial Correlations..........................................................................................................49 5.0 Analysis Results ..............................................................................................................51 Border Health Equity Transportation Study ii 5.1 Comparing San Ysidro and the City of San Diego (Healthy Communities Atlas Data) .........51 5.2 Comparing the South Bay SRA and the Remainder of the San Diego Region (Community Health Statistics) ..........................................................................................56 5.3 Partial Correlations Analysis Results .................................................................................58 5.4 Partial Correlations Analysis Key Findings .........................................................................66 6.0 Mobility/Built Environment Recommendations and Potential Health Effects .............70 6.1 Identification of Key Recommendations ...........................................................................70 6.1.1 Existing Conditions Report ......................................................................................71 6.1.2 Previous Plans and Studies ......................................................................................71 6.1.3 Community Workshop ...........................................................................................72 6.2 Review of Recommendations ..........................................................................................73 6.2.1 Project Team Review ..............................................................................................74 6.2.2 City of San Diego and Caltrans Input ......................................................................74 6.2.3 Potential Mitigation Techniques to Reduce Exposure to Transportation-Related Pollution .............................................................................75 6.3 Final Recommendations and Potential Health Effects ........................................................78 6.3.1 Final Set of Proposed Recommendations .................................................................78 6.3.2 Potential Health Impacts of Implementing Final Recommendations ..........................87 7.0 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan ....................................................................................89 7.1 Purpose of the Monitoring/Evaluation Plan ......................................................................89 7.1.1 Monitoring Methodology .......................................................................................90 7.1.2 Evaluation Methodology .........................................................................................91 7.1.3 Identifying Performance Targets .............................................................................92 7.2 Monitoring and Evaluation Questions ..............................................................................92 7.2.1 Planning Process Evaluation ....................................................................................92 7.2.2 Mobility/Built Environment Outcome Evaluation ......................................................92 7.2.3 Health Impact Evaluation ........................................................................................93
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Advancing Racial Equity in Health Care
    COMMONWEALTH FUND TASK FORCE ON PAYMENT AND DELIVERY SYSTEM REFORM Advancing Racial Equity in Health Care ROSE WONG THE ISSUE: The U.S. health care system is not immune report communities’ social needs; and level of trust in from the racism that plagues American society. Our health local health systems by diverse and marginalized groups. care is characterized by long-standing inequities in access, • Require payers and purchasers to publicly report quality, and outcomes for people of color that have been utilization and quality data by race and ethnicity. brought into stark relief by the COVID-19 pandemic. • Improve access to information by race and ethnicity as THE SOLUTION: Recognizing the urgency to advance racial part of a national disaster and pandemic preparedness equity, the Commonwealth Fund’s 18-member Task Force strategy by: on Payment and Delivery System Reform reviewed the – requiring health systems, payers, and other health evidence from the last decade of delivery system reforms care entities collect and share race and ethnicity data and put forward concrete, actionable steps to confront during national emergencies in real-time with public and combat racism in health care. officials. WHAT WE PROPOSE: The Task Force has issued a number – developing federal requirements for national, state of policy imperatives for reducing health disparities and and local authorities to regularly collect and report promoting racial equity. Read the full report here. data on the potential and actual impact of disasters on people of color. Require That Data Stratified by Race and • Create and use a national all-payer claims database to Ethnicity Be Collected, Publicly Reported, assess the quality and validity of race and ethnicity and Used data in claims, and strengthen standards for collecting • Establish a standardized, parsimonious set of core and reporting this data.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Health Equity: Moving Beyond “Health Disparities”
    Health Equity: Moving Beyond “Health Disparities” Background “Health disparities” are differences between specific population groups in the incidence, prevalence, mortality or burden of disease and illnesses. Reporting on health disparities typically illustrates how some population groups have higher rates of certain diseases and conditions than other groups. For instance, it has long been documented that African American and some Latino ethnic groups have higher infant mortality rates than white populations. The term “health equity” broadens the disparities concept by asking, “Why are some populations at greater risk of illnesses and preventable deaths than others?” This question leads to a deeper analysis and exploration of the causative factors that contribute to disparities. In the case of infant mortality, where African Americans suffer twice the rate of infant deaths than whites, the answer is often not because of a need to increase clinical encounters, but because of the neighborhood in which the mother lived, the foods she ate, her quality of health prior to pregnancy, her levels of support, and her access to transportation, neighborhood conditions, and culturally appropriate providers. Of course, community- centered, affordable, quality health care is also essential, but is not the only lens through which this type of complex problem should be examined. To deepen our understanding of health equity, we must first understand the concept of “equity” – just and fair inclusion so all can participate and prosper. 1 “Health equity” focuses on the root causes or social determinants of health. It requires broadening our definition of “health” to mean one’s overall quality of life, an analysis of socioeconomic factors, including education, income and wealth inequality, and a willingness to address racial and social inequality.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices User Guides-Health Equity in Tobacco Prevention and Control
    User Guides Health Equity in Tobacco Prevention and Control Acknowledgements This guide was produced by the Center for Public Health Systems Science (CPHSS) at the Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis. Primary contributors: Laura Brossart, Sarah Moreland-Russell, Stephanie Andersen, Anne Shea, Heidi Walsh, Sarah Schell, Laura Bach, Jennifer Cameron, Anneke Mohr, Laura Edison, Megan Multack, Susan Vorkoper Valued input was provided by: Stephen Babb, Diane Beistle, Rebecca Bunnell, Gloria Bryan, Kevin Collins, Shanna Cox, Monica Eischen, John Francis, Bridgette Garrett, Carissa Holmes, Brian King, Brick Lancaster, Rod Lew, Tim McAfee, Jane Mitchko, Jeannette Noltenius, Janet Porter, Gabbi Promoff, Coletta Reid, Brenda Richards, William Robinson, Robert Rodes, Anna Schecter, Scout, Karla Sneegas, Anne Sowell Valued input for the case studies was provided by: Bob Gordon, California LGBT Tobacco Education Partnership Janae Duncan, Utah Tobacco Prevention and Control Program Other contributions: Photograph on page 12 from the collection of Stanford University (tobacco.stanford.edu) Photograph on page 14 courtesy of Jóvenes de Salud Photograph on page 15 courtesy of Counter Tobacco Photograph on page 22 courtesy of Oklahoma State Department of Health Photograph on page 32 courtesy of the Jefferson County Department of Health and the Health Action Partnership Photograph on page 34 courtesy of the LGBT Tobacco Education Partnership, California Table of Contents Guide to the Reader .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • To Build a Fairer, Healthier World for Everyone, Everywhere
    It’s time to build a fairer, healthier world for everyone, everywhere. World Health Day 2021 Health equity and its determinants Health equity and its Health inequity and COVID-19 determinants Around the globe, COVID-19 has run along the seams of existing health inequities – the unfair This is the second World Health Day to and preventable differences in people’s health, fall during the COVID-19 pandemic – well-being, and access to quality health services. the world’s worst peacetime health crisis This is shown by the fact that COVID-19 cases and deaths in deprived areas are double those of in a century. It comes amidst gruelling more advantaged areas. and painful times for the world’s people who are dealing with the impacts of the Health inequity manifests itself in our pandemic, including those working in the communities: people worst affected by health sector. COVID-19 are those least able to withstand it – older people and others with pre-existing severe illness; socially disadvantaged people As of 1 April 2021, over 2.8 million people had with serious health conditions such as heart died from the COVID-19 virus, and more than disease and diabetes; people without Internet 130 million people had contracted it – many of access unable to receive the latest information whom now live with long-term health impacts. At to protect themselves; people unable to afford the same time, the wider health consequences out-of-pocket payments for treatment; and those of the pandemic have left untold millions bearing socially excluded, for example homeless people, the costs in terms of their emotional, social, or migrants, who may also experience obstacles and economic well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Equity Dataset with Equity Tables
    Michigan Health Equity Data Tables and Related Technical Documents 2000-2009 Michigan Health Equity Data Project Health Disparities Reduction and Minority Health Section Division of Health, Wellness, and Disease Control and Division of Genomics, Perinatal Health, and Chronic Disease Epidemiology Michigan Department of Community Health May, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .......................................................................................................................3 Table 1: African Americans Compared to Whites as the Reference Group, Michigan, 2000-2009..........................................................................................................................5 Table 2: American Indians/Alaska Natives Compared to Whites as the Reference Group, Michigan, 2000-2009.........................................................................................................6 Table 3: Arabs Compared to Whites as the Reference Group, Michigan, 2000-2009.......7 Table 4: Asians Compared to Whites as the Reference Group, Michigan, 2000-2009.....8 Table 5: Hispanics/Latinos Compared to Whites as the Reference Group, Michigan, 2000-2009……..................................................................................................................9 Table 6: Index of Disparity (ID), Overall Population, Michigan, 2000-2009……..............10 Table 7: Summary Table: Change in Health Inequity Over Time, by Race/Ethnicity and Overall Population, Michigan, 2000-2009……………………….......................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Priorities for Research on Equity and Health
    Final Report – November 2010 Priorities for research on equity and health: Implications for global and national priority setting and the role of WHO to take the health equity research agenda forward Piroska Östlin (Task Force coordinator and core author), Regional Director’s Office, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; [email protected] Ted Schrecker (core author), Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine and Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, Canada; [email protected] Ritu Sadana (core author), Director's Office, Department of Health Systems Financing, Health Systems and Services Cluster, World Health Organization; [email protected] Josiane Bonnefoy, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Chile Lucy Gilson, University of Cape Town, South Africa and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom Clyde Hertzman, Human Early Learning Partnership (HELP), University of British Columbia, Canada Michael P. Kelly, Centre for Public Health Excellence, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, United Kingdom Tord Kjellstrom, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia Ronald Labonté, Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine and Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, Canada Olle Lundberg, Centre for Health Equity Studies, Stockholm, Sweden Carles Muntaner, Social Equity and Health Section, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada Jennie Popay, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, United Kingdom Gita Sen, Indian Institute of Management, Centre for Public Policy, Bangalore, India Ziba Vaghri, Human Early Learning Partnership (HELP), University of British Columbia, Canada Commissioned by the World Health Organization 1 © World Health Organization, Geneva, 2010 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing Health Equity in Health Department's Public Health Practice
    Advancing Health Equity in Health Department’s Public Health Practice Recommendations for the Public Health Accreditation Board February 2018 Written by Human Impact Partners Commissioned by the Public Health National Center for Innovations at the Public Health Accreditation Board Acknowledgements This paper was written by Megan Gaydos, a consultant with Human Impact Partners, and Lili Farhang, Human Impact Partners’ Co-Director. We would like to express our gratitude to Robin Wilcox, Jessica Fisher, and Kaye Bender from PHAB for providing Human Impact Partners an opportunity to write this paper and for their encouragement throughout the project. This paper was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. We deeply appreciate the valuable contributions of our project Advisory Committee in providing feedback, reviewing documents, and developing recommendations. We would also like to acknowledge the advisors who helped develop the Health Equity Guide web resource as, without them, the Guide would not be as strong as it is. Project Advisory Committee Ashley Kraybill, Performance Management Coordinator, Public Health Madison/Dane County Bob Prentice, Retired/Former Director of BARHII Ellen Rabinowitz, Health Officer, Washtenaw County (MI) Health Department Jay Butler, Chief Medical Officer, State of Alaska Jeanne Ayers, Assistant Commissioner and Chief Health Equity Strategist, Minnesota Department of Health Joe Finkbonner, Director, Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board Jordan Bingham, Health Equity Coordinator, Public Health Madison/Dane County Katherine Schaff, Health Equity Coordinator, Berkeley Media Studies Group Linda Rudolph, Director, Center for Climate Change & Health Pamela Russo, Program Officer, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Rex Archer, Director of Health, Kansas City, MO Health Department Wilma J.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Gradients and Health Inequalities in the Americas
    Sustainable Development and Health Equity Technical Report Series 1 Environmental Gradients and Health Inequalities in the Americas Access to Water and Sanitation as Determinants of Health This report shows that, while the Region of the Americas as a whole was on track to meet the targets of MDG 7 in water and sanitation, large, pervasive, and growing inequalities between and within countries remain hidden behind the regional averages. Tackling these environmentally determined health inequities should be the highest priority in the post-2015 development agenda: inequality is a growing threat to both global health governance and sustainability. The first step is to document, measure, and monitor these inequalities. This report could serve as a benchmark for assessing the impact of actions taken toward health equity under new and existing policies and comparing the results over time. Sustainable Development and Health Equity Technical Report Series 1 Environmental Gradients and Health Inequalities in the Americas Access to Water and Sanitation as Determinants of Health Special Program on Sustainable Development and Health Equity Washington, D.C. 2016 PAHO HQ Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data **************************************************************************************** Pan American Health Organization Environmental Gradients and Health Inequalities in the Americas. Access to Water and Sanitation as Determinants of Health. Washington, DC : PAHO, 2016. 1. Social Determinants of Health. 2. Environmental Health. 3. Water Value. 4. Water Supply. 5. Sanitation. 6. Health Inequalities. 7. Equity in Access. 8. Gradient. 9. Americas. I. Title. ISBN: 978-92-75-11913-6 (NLM Classification: WA 30.5) © Pan American Health Organization, 2016. All rights reserved. The Pan American Health Organization welcomes requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications, in part or in full.
    [Show full text]
  • Extent, Scope and Impacts of COVID-19 on Health Inequities: the Evidence
    Extent, scope and impacts of COVID-19 on health inequities: the evidence 4 November 2020, N Valentine A review of the evidence • Which social determinants of health (SDH) are impacting inequities in infection, severity and mortality? • Which population groups are at higher risk? • How is the COVID-19 pandemic affecting other health outcomes through the SDH? Inequities in infection and mortality attributed to social determinants • 46 studies, most ecological studies, majority North America, Western Europe • 44 show that disadvantaged groups are more negatively impacted through: - higher COVID-19 infection rates, - worse COVID-19 severity, - lack of access to treatment and - higher COVID-19 mortality rates. Source: Wachter B, Michalski et al. Journal of Health Monitoring The extent of inequities in infection and mortality attributed to social determinants of health Death rates in COVID-19 cases by deprivation quintile and sex • Death rates in the most deprived area quintile are roughly double the rates in the least deprived area quintile for both males and females Source: Public Health England. (2020) Disparities in the risk and outcomes of COVID-19 Social determinants exacerbating inequities • Poverty and reliance on daily wages, or the informal economy • Weak social assistance programmes • Deprived housing, deprived public areas and poor services • Housing and public area crowding • Poor sanitation and lack of hygiene facilities • Poor health coverage and poor access to health care • Poorly paid and poorly supported working conditions
    [Show full text]
  • STATE Policymakers' GUIDE for ADVANCING HEALTH Equity
    State Policymakers’ Guide for Advancing Health Equity Through Health Reform Implementation Carrie Hanlon and Brittany Giles u g u s t A 2012 II State Policymakers’ Guide For Advancing Health Equity Through Health Reform Implementation Copyright © 2012 National Academy for State Health Policy. For reprint permission, please contact NASHP at (207) 874-6524. This publication is available on the web at: www.nashp.org b o u t t h e A t i o na l c A d e m y f o r t A t e e A l t h o l i c y A N A S h P The National Academy for State Health Policy We work across a broad range of health policy (NASHP) is an independent academy of state topics including: health policymakers. We are dedicated to help- • Affordable Care Act and State Health ing states achieve excellence in health policy Care Reform and practice. A non-profit and non-partisan • Coverage and Access organization, NASHP provides a forum for con- • Medicaid structive work across branches and agencies of • Quality, Cost, and Health System Per- state government on critical health issues. Our formance funders include both public and private organi- • Long Term and Chronic Care zations that contract for our services. • Quality and Patient Safety To accomplish our mission we: • Population and Public Health • Insurance Coverage and Cost Contain- • Convene state leaders to solve problems ment and share solutions • Conduct policy analyses and research Our strengths and capabilities include: • Disseminate information on state policies • Active participation by a large number and programs of volunteer state officials • Provide technical assistance to states • Developing consensus reports through The responsibility for health care and health active involvement in discussions among care policy does not reside in a single state people with disparate political views agency or department.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Equity Efforts
    ASPR TRACIE Technical Assistance Request Request Receipt Date (by ASPR TRACIE): May 11, 2021 Response Date: May 11, 2021 Type of TA Request: Standard Request: ASPR TRACIE received a request for federal resources to assist with COVID-19 vaccine equity. Response: ASPR TRACIE reviewed several documents, including those on our COVID-19 Resource Page. Section I of this document includes links to relevant federal resources. When limited supply of vaccine first became available, the federal government directed its use in high priority groups identified by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. As supply has increased, the federal government established several initiatives to direct resources to underserved and disproportionately affected groups. These efforts include the Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care (which ended in April 2021), the Federal Retail Pharmacy Program, the Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine Program, and support for Community Vaccination Centers and mobile vaccination sites. I. Federal Vaccine Equity Resources Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). A Guide for Community Partners: Increasing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Members of Racial and Ethnic Minority Communities. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This guide provides information for community-based organizations interesting in conducting outreach to support vaccine confidence in racial and ethnic minority communities. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Communication Resources for COVID-19 Vaccines. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This web page includes a variety of resources to educate the public and increase vaccine confidence. Materials include a social media toolkit, print resources, stickers, graphics, and videos. Many resources are available in multiple languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing Health Equity in NYC: a Place-Based Approach
    Advancing Health Equity in NYC: A Place-Based Approach Oxiris Barbot, MD First Deputy Commissioner New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene TODAY’S OBJECTIVES • The Case for Investing in Key Neighborhoods • Take Care New York 2020 • Working with the Health Care Delivery System • Operationalizing the Place-Based Approach HEALTH STATUS OF NYC Trends in Life Expectancy at Birth, NYC and US, 2000-2011 82 New York City 80.9 80.8 81 80.6 80.1 80.2 80 79.7 79.2 United States 79.0 78.7 78.7 79 78.5 78.5 78.2 78.1 78.2 77.9 77.8 78 77.7 77.6 77.6 77.2 77.0 77.0 76.8 77 Age Years in Age 76 75 74 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Note: NCHS re-estimated 2001-2009 life table data using new 2001-2009 intercensal population estimates and data may differ from those previously published. New York City data for 2001-2008 have been revised by using interpolated population estimates based on 2010 census counts and may differ from previously published. 2011 data are preliminary. NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Bureau of Vital Statistics 2014 Life Expectancy at Birth by Race/ Ethnicity, NYC, 2003-2013 84.0 82.1 81.7 81.9 82.2 82.0 81.5 81.1 81.3 80.6 80.8 80.9 81.3 81.2 81.3 79.7 80.0 80.6 80.6 80.0 79.4 79.5 78.9 78.0 77.0 77.2 76.6 76.9 76.0 76.1 75.8 75.4 74.9 Age Years in Age 74.0 74.3 74.5 Hispanic 72.0 Non-Hispanic White Non-Hispanic Black 70.0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012* * Life expectancy at birth estimates for 2012 are preliminary.
    [Show full text]