Hi Ben, thanks very much for your thoughtful discussion. I'd appreciate a copy of your talk that you mention at the end. To help address the question of invoking/using the law in public health studies, please see the attached summary document written by a team from The City Project in response to a request by the California Endowment, on addressing health inequities using civil rights laws. The Endowment funds HIAs, and is very interested in health issues in California, such as the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"). Of course, many of these lessons apply in other states, and have some applicability in countries that have an intensive civil rights/human rights legal enforcement system.
Marc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Cave" <ben.cave(a)bcahealth.co.uk>
To: "marcomcast" <mbrenman001(a)comcast.net>, "Elizabeth Murphy" <elizabethmurphy(a)flhsa.org>
Cc: "TRB Health and Transportation" <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>, "Martin Birley" <martin(a)birleyhia.co.uk>, "Jenny Mindell" <j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk>, "Ben Harris-Roxas (b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au)" <b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au>, "Alex Scott-Samuel" <A.Scott-Samuel(a)liverpool.ac.uk>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 6:35:12 AM
Subject: RE: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Dear all
I add my voice to the chorus of support – this has been an interesting dialogue.
However … we have deviated from the original challenge that Marc posed, namely the perceived failure of HIA to invoke/use legal definitions. [I have not revisited the original question – probably a mistake – but I think that sums it up].
This is a valid challenge and one to which we HIA practitioners should respond. It is a challenge for Public Health generally.
>From my own point of view I think we should use all levers we can to ensure that the recommendations made are irrefutable and are enacted. Invoking a legal duty, where one exists, would seem to be a powerful way of doing this. This applies as much to HIAs as to other engagements with policy (at any level).
Our conversation has ranged from human rights to the legal arguments in planning decisions (my input) to the loan requirements levied by banks for large infrastructure projects.
The final section on humanitarian aid in Haiti is interesting and sadly not surprising (diarrhoeal disease, sanitation and water supply are not fashionable topics that enjoy a high media profile) but as Martin identifies it is not ‘on topic’. In the Haitian example an authoritative statement on the necessity of enforcing building codes would have saved lives. HIA was not needed here.
My decidedly lay understanding is that legal challenge is all about applying the law to a specific case under scrutiny. How can Public Health help with this? A specific instance might be taken to represent the whole but legal challenge is on that specific instance.
There are examples of public health analysis directly being used to formulate policy and to set legal precedent (not the same thing I know) in Health in All Policies with regard to tobacco, alcohol, sugar etc – it is clear that large amounts of political capital are also needed to ensure the law is continuously enforced.
In analysis and recommendations in HIA it is easier to focus on health protecting aspects eg air quality and noise than on soc dets. In the transport example Marc cited (placing a levy on cars entering centre of city [San Francisco]) it would be simpler to get air quality readings for a defined area and show they exceed or meet thresholds. The population is relatively easy to define. The thresholds are clear and sanctions simple to apply. The low-income group suffer – they will be geographically dispersed – the effects will be harder to show and more open to challenge. Solutions to mitigate adverse effects will be complicated and politically challenging.
What happens at a local level on an individual case? I have yet to find a way in which public health can provide the definitive voice on individual cases at local level concerning social determinants of health. We offer broader supporting evidence. We are better at policy level where larger numbers of people are affected. Does this mean we are of less use in individual cases? We can make a strong case if public health colleagues have the time and resources to gather quantitative & qualitative information about people living in a particular area and the likely effects that a change (transport policy, opening of betting shop etc) would have. Would this be enough to set precedent in other cases or would it be too specific? It would be expensive to do each time a legal challenge was mounted
I end with questions – and I welcome all responses. I’d be interested in some overarching/reflective comments from Marc given that he is the instigator of our interaction.
I gave a talk to PH colleagues a while back where I touched on this – please get in touch if you would like copy of text
Ben
Ben Cave
www.bcahealth.eu
Ben Cave Associates Ltd
103 Clarendon Road
Leeds Innovation Centre
Leeds
LS2 9DF
United Kingdom
LinkedIn: Ben Cave
Twitter: Ben_Cave
Academia: Ben Cave
T 00 44 113 322 2583
M 00 44 7786 930 391
Unless agreed in writing to the contrary, all transactions are subject to our terms and conditions, available at https://bitly.com/Nsdobl
Ben Cave Associates Ltd is a company registered in England & Wales
Company no 04578866
Registered address: 103 Clarendon Road, Leeds Innovation Centre, Leeds, LS2 9DF,
Ben Cave Associates Ltd operates anti-virus programs. BCA does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed.
From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net [mailto:mbrenman001@comcast.net]
Sent: 18 June 2014 17:23
To: Elizabeth Murphy
Cc: TRB Health and Transportation; Martin Birley; Jenny Mindell; Ben Harris-Roxas (b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au); Ben Cave; Alex Scott-Samuel
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Hi folks, thanks very much for the kind words. Attached is the evaluation paper. As I mentioned to some of you, I also have a paper on social equity impact assessment that might be of interest. For the bigger issues on planning, governance, and equity, you might want to take a look at Tom Sanchez' and my book, "Planning as if People Matter: Governing for Social Equity," Island Press, 2012. We also get into some difficult issues like planning ethics. For those interested particularly in transportation, Tom's and my book, "The Right to Transportation," American Planning Association, 2007, might be of interest. This book does not have a heavy health emphasis, and predates much discussion of HIAs. It does include material on the issues of people with disabilities, however, which many analyses, even equity analyses, ignore.
Best regards,
Marc Brenman
mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Murphy" < elizabethmurphy(a)flhsa.org >
To: "TRB Health and Transportation" < h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net >, "marcomcast" < mbrenman001(a)comcast.net >, "Martin Birley" < martin(a)birleyhia.co.uk >
Cc: "Jenny Mindell" < j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk >, "Ben Harris-Roxas ( b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au )" < b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au >, "Ben Cave" < ben.cave(a)bcahealth.co.uk >, "Alex Scott-Samuel" < A.Scott-Samuel(a)liverpool.ac.uk >
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 9:01:50 AM
Subject: RE: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Thanks so much for sharing this thought provoking and informative discussion with us all.
I am also interested in reading your paper, Marc. It seems that a number of us are. Perhaps you could share it with the whole group? Thank you!
Best,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth Murphy
Active Transportation Specialist
Finger Lakes Health Systems Agency
(585) 224-3146 office
(916) 201-1626 cell
From: h+t--friends-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ mailto:h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net ] On Behalf Of Salim Vohra
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 3:17 AM
To: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net ; Martin Birley
Cc: TRB Health and Transportation; Jenny Mindell; Ben Harris-Roxas ( b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au ); Ben Cave; Alex Scott-Samuel
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Marc,
I would be interested in reading your paper. Good discussion thank you.
Best,
Sal
Dr Salim Vohra MBChB MSc PhD
| co-Chair of the Health (HIA) Section of the International Association for Impact Assessment|
| the international association for HIA and IA practitioners, academics and consultants – join today at www.iaia.org |
| Public Health By Design, Craneshaw House, Hounslow, London, TW3 1DA |
| email: sal(a)publichealthbydesign.com mobile: 00 44 7 506 165 506 |
From: " mbrenman001(a)comcast.net " < mbrenman001(a)comcast.net >
Date: Monday, 16 June 2014 12:32
To: Martin Birley < martin(a)birleyhia.co.uk >
Cc: Alex Scott-Samuel < A.Scott-Samuel(a)liverpool.ac.uk >, Salim Vohra < sal(a)publichealthbydesign.com >, Ben Cave < ben.cave(a)bcahealth.co.uk >, Jenny Mindell < j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk >, TRB Health and Transportation < h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net >, "Ben Harris-Roxas ( b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au )" < b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au >
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Thanks, Martin. Many of these international principles apply in principle but not in practice in the US; they have little or no legal standing. Individual organizations could adopt them, and also pursue their own visions, like the Gates Foundation. The values of a very large and rich organization like Gates can drive international efforts. Gates has been criticized for this; driving out other efforts.
I wonder about the effectiveness of the work of corporations "ahead of the national government in which project is located." For example, when I look at sixty years of humanitarian assistance in Haiti, I see almost no progress. Organizations built medical clinics and hospitals that met no seismic design and construction standards, even though they were on a known earthquake zone, and consequently fell down in the big earthquake a few years ago. This argues for inclusion of best practices from various forms of infrastructure when HIAs are done. This could be another example of the "silo" or "stovepipe" problem.
Another aspect from Haiti is the fact that some otherwise highminded organizations refuse to provide contraception, family planning, and abortion funding, services, or advice due to religious and theological reasons. They thus perpetuate poverty and thus wipe out any progress that may be made in another area.
A third example those medical people on this discussion know much more about than me-- the lack of education and aid on basic sanitary services in places like Haiti. I watch sophisticated medical services being provided, when a shipload of 50 cent Chinese shovels and soap and instructions about digging pit latrines away from water sources and washing hands could accomplish more in cutting the chain of disease transmission.
A fourth example from tragic Haiti is the emphasis by some organizations on electronic solutions to "problems," using cellphone and computer networks, for example, when much lower tech solutions are needed.
Sorry to go on like this, but when I look at evaluation of humanitarian operations, I see this sort of thing. If anyone is interested, I have a paper on this subject.
Best,
Marc
From: "Martin Birley" < martin(a)birleyhia.co.uk >
To: "marcomcast" < mbrenman001(a)comcast.net >
Cc: "Alex Scott-Samuel" < A.Scott-Samuel(a)liverpool.ac.uk >, "Salim Vohra" < sal(a)publichealthbydesign.com >, "Ben Cave" < ben.cave(a)bcahealth.co.uk >, "Jenny Mindell" < j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk >, "TRB Health and Transportation" < h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net >, "Ben Harris-Roxas ( b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au )" < b.harris-roxas(a)unsw.edu.au >
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 12:06:42 AM
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
Marc
It would be great to have your detailed view of how the IFC PF and Equator Principles apply in US in light of what US is and is not signatory to. Also how well IFC addresses civil rights.
Treaties on human rights include the right to health. we have had legal opinion in the past that this is about progressive realization and that decisions by government that would reduce health are then in breach of treaty obligations.
In HIA I'm usually just constructing a justified argument to a corporation who are concerned about their reputation, social license to operate and investment risk rating. They are usually ahead of the national government in which project is located.
I think the IFC PS anticipates your point and expects clients to act even when government is uninterested. It's a loan condition.
Martin
hi all -
I have been curating this page
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Complete-Streets/184828124895238?ref_type=bo…
for the last couple of years. I am trying to build the audience and feature health connections to street design. My target audience has been the general public. but I'm finding that general public seems more interested in detailed design issues closer to home.
Could you visit and give me feedback? How should I better position the content?
thanks!
Irene
Irene H. Yen, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Associate Professor
Division of General Internal Medicine
Department of Medicine
University of California, San Francisco
Associate Director, Experiential Learning, Health & Society Pathway
3333 California Street, Suite 335
Box 0856
San Francisco, CA 94143-0856 [for FedEx - use 94118]
(415) 502 8291 (fax)
http://dgim.ucsf.edu/about/yen.html
******************************************************************
EMAIL ADDRESS: irene.yen(a)ucsf.edu
******************************************************************
We may like the concept of evidence-based decision-making but being realistic, political (including planning) decisions are based on a whole range of things.
So most people now aim for 'evidence-informed decision-making', for which HIA is well-suited.
It would be daft to think that planners (or others in local, regional or national government) consider only health when making their decisions.
But the more that the decision-makers are involved with the HIA process, the more likely they are to engage with the recommendations produced.
And I am very surprised by the statement that public health professionals are unaware of social equity or civil rights. Certainly not the case in the UK. And HIA, as accepted across Europe and I thought worldwide, considers both the health impacts and their distribution across the population.
Dr Jennifer Mindell
Clinical senior lecturer
Health and Social Surveys Research Group
Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health
UCL
1-19 Torrington Place
London WC1E 6BT
Tel. 020 7679 1269 (Internal x41269)
Survey doctor: 07770-537238
Fax 020 7813 0242
Email: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
Web: IRIS web page
Journal of Transport and Health: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA)
in Transportation Planning
To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Message-ID:
<648017716.8220462.1402144198106.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Who is putting on this webinar? It appears to be something called IBPI. "The Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation is an exciting center for research and learning that is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel. IBPI?s aim is to advance bicycling and walking as integral elements of the transportation system in Oregon?s communities." Where's the neutrality and objectivity?
In regard to this statement, "Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity within transportation planning," much HIA work does not adequately address social equity and EJ issues. For example, HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias (see "bicycle innovation" above), which often is in tension with the needs of low income communities and communities of color.
As to this, "It also augments community and stakeholder engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee - where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by design," much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed. Another concern with "advisory committees" is that fact that they only provide "advice" which the "planning" entity is not obligated to pay any attention to. A colleague who leads an immigration advocacy group told me a couple of years ago, "I no longer serve on advisory committees because they don't make policy or control anything."
Marc Brenman
mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
Marc,
Sure. (And yes, exploited was an ironic choice given the civil rights angle, but not particularly intentional word.) Although I will say it is unclear to me if you are asking how *I* personally know or how the field knows. I'll assume it is the latter - that you are asking "what does HIA add to a planning process that is not already there and how do we know it helps vulnerable communities."
HIA is far from perfect and not appropriate for every situation, but it has a valid claim that and HIA augments the current planning process to allow for more informed decisions. Public health professionals generally view planning as inadequately addressing human health or health equity even though disparities in human health are well-documented as are both social and built-environment factors leading to those disparities. HIA uses this population-based health evidence to identify intended and unintended health consequences of proposed plans/projects/policies. It aims to maximize health overall and decrease health disparities for vulnerable communities - a decision-making frame that planners do not necessarily use as they are balancing all sorts of interests in addition to health. But it is a useful frame, particularly in a social justice situation.
Transportation planners believe that they protect human health through NEPA, but the reality is that NEPA has been institutionalized to identify exposure concentrations in the physical environment and rarely makes it all the way to human health or to addressing some of the more indirect health pathways. I believe that the humanizing factor is a pretty big deal. Additionally, HIA - particularly when it is outside the regulatory planning/environmental process - starts from a place of identifying ALL possible paths to human health. All paths means even things outside of the defined alternatives - very similar to some traditional EJ work. So an HIA may point out mitigation measures for factors, design features, or the lack thereof that planners have dismissed as impractical or too expensive, etc. In some cases, it might suggest that planners need to go back to the alternatives definitions and rework.
One place where HIA may augment traditional EJ for advocating for justice is in its ability to provide a stakeholder/decision-making framework to deliberate about competing health concerns. An example from my dissertation is the Lake Merritt BART Station Area plan. When planning for zoning for transit-oriented development, what health consideration is the very-low-income Asian community most concerned about? affordable housing? losing the park used for Tai Chi? air pollution? culturally specific food? culturally specific public space? all of it? If the community has to choose, then what? Where to put advocacy efforts? HIA, by tracing those pathways organizes and provides communities an evidence-base by which to deliberate the various pathways and which has the most impact on health. It can then guide/augment EJ efforts.
Finally, HIA has health equity as one of a handful of explicit values. This is completely congruent with EJ values and efforts. What is different, however, is the ability of public health professionals to articulate that value using professional/academic knowledge and increasingly modeled information. I'd also argue that HIA, with its flexibility, may be more useful than a traditional EJ approach to health equity in the policy arena because EJ sometimes struggles when addressing spatially diffuse issues.
That said, HIA is a process and product that is centered around information. HIA documents advocate for human health but will not advocate for a specific outcome/alternative. That is left up to the actual community to use the HIA information to advocate in an inherently political planning process.
In sum, a good HIA will augment EJ efforts by outlining where intentional and unintentional health effects and health disparities are likely to occur with a public decision. This is a good thing and doesn't have to be an either/or. HIA should tell you where the health problems are and identifies specific human health indicators that might be useful arguing for and monitoring the legal aspects of civil rights and EJ. Again, a win for vulnerable communities.
~Nicole
Nicole Iroz-Elardo, PhD
Portland State University
irozelardo(a)yahoo.com
> From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net [mailto:mbrenman001@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 2:17 PM
> To: TRB Health and Transportation; nicole.iroz-elardo(a)state.or.us
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] HIA Webinar
>
> Thanks, Nicole, can you tell us more about this: "HIA processes and products engage the notion of equity in ways that are currently not exploited in planning and EJ circles"? How do you know what is "exploited" [an odd choice of words!] in planning and EJ circles?
> Marc Brenman
> mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
>
> From: "Iroz-Elardo Nicole" <nicole.iroz-elardo(a)state.or.us>
> To: "h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net" <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 1:17:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] HIA Webinar
>
> Hi all. I am the presenter of the HIA webinar being discussed. It is hosted by IBPI which is associated with OTREC and Portland State University - my doctoral institution. It is an offshoot of lessons learned from both my doctoral research and time as an HIA practitioner. My doctoral research takes a broad look at transportation planning, so the webinar will not be bike/ped specific. The webinar was initiated because OTREC provided some doctoral support for the research and this seemed like a good avenue to distribute practice-related findings. This particular webinar will address the wide variation within and between disciplines about meaning, definitions, and methods associated with concepts such as health, equity, and engagement; this often result in conflicts between and within professions mid-HIA due to inappropriate expectations of HIA.
>
> Regarding the statements about social and environmental justice... While my doctoral research does not address civil rights law directly, it is a critique of the extent to which HIA proclaims itself participatory and thus protective of community. HIA assumes that there is value in stakeholder/collaborative engagement; it is an offshoot of what is currently termed "health in all policies" approach in public health which suggests any time you can bring public health evidence in for public consideration, decision-makers are more likely to make a more informed and thus healthier public decision. But make no mistake, HIA is generally informed by a stakeholder process engaging in an even broader stakeholder process. Because of that, all the caveats in the literature about power and stakeholder/collaborative processes apply; stakeholder processes are easily co-opted and are highly dependent on representation, timing, and good facilitation to address power structures. HIA, while!
> committed in theory to good process, is still in its infancy in defining and bounding engagement. And community driven HIAs are relatively rare in the U.S.
>
> My research shows that the social justice and community aspects of HIA practice are less a result of stakeholder/participation formats and more a function of explicit HIA values such as a commitment to health equity and broad determinants of health. Through these values, public health professionals are able to identify and advocate for underserved or unorganized communities - particularly in spatially-based plans. It is also important to realize that public health professionals engage in HIAs because they do not see the current NEPA regulatory and federal/state legal structures do not go far enough to protect population health and health equity. And HIA processes and products engage the notion of equity in ways that are currently not exploited in planning and EJ circles - a likely win for vulnerable communities. So HIA may not explicitly address civil rights law (certainly true in most U.S. HIAs), but it engages in the notion of health disparities and thus health, socia!
> l, and environmental equity.
>
> The dissertation employs a case-study approach; two of the three cases are HIAs that are centered around non-English EJ populations in the U.S. and thus might be of particular interest to some commenters. It is a reasonably interesting read for a dissertation and publically available through OTREC at http://otrec.us/project/715.
>
> Fun to see this being discussed! Hope to have some of you on the webinar on July 16th.http://otrec.us/events/entry/health_impact_assessment_hia_in_transportation_planning
>
> ~Nicole
>
> Nicole Iroz-Elardo, PhD
> Portland State University
> irozelardo(a)yahoo.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: h+t--friends-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Ofh+t--friends-request(a)chrispy.net
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 10:00 AM
> To: h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
> Subject: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 5
>
> Send H+T--Friends mailing list submissions to
> h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> h+t--friends-request(a)chrispy.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> h+t--friends-owner(a)chrispy.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of H+T--Friends digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA (Mindell, Jenny)
> 2. Re: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
> (mbrenman001(a)comcast.net)
> 3. David Ragland Profiled for Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
> Safe Routes to Schools work (Phyllis ORRICK)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:58:44 +0000
> From: "Mindell, Jenny" <j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
> To: "h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net" <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
> Message-ID:
> <7354587cd221478c8333e68518d1a139(a)DB3PR01MB331.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> We may like the concept of evidence-based decision-making but being realistic, political (including planning) decisions are based on a whole range of things.
> So most people now aim for 'evidence-informed decision-making', for which HIA is well-suited.
> It would be daft to think that planners (or others in local, regional or national government) consider only health when making their decisions.
> But the more that the decision-makers are involved with the HIA process, the more likely they are to engage with the recommendations produced.
> And I am very surprised by the statement that public health professionals are unaware of social equity or civil rights. Certainly not the case in the UK. And HIA, as accepted across Europe and I thought worldwide, considers both the health impacts and their distribution across the population.
>
>
> Dr Jennifer Mindell
> Clinical senior lecturer
> Health and Social Surveys Research Group Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health UCL
> 1-19 Torrington Place
> London WC1E 6BT
>
> Tel. 020 7679 1269 (Internal x41269)
> Survey doctor: 07770-537238
> Fax 020 7813 0242
> Email: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
> Web: IRIS web page
>
> Journal of Transport and Health: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC)
> From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA)
> in Transportation Planning
> To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
> Message-ID:
> <648017716.8220462.1402144198106.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Who is putting on this webinar? It appears to be something called IBPI. "The Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation is an exciting center for research and learning that is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel. IBPI?s aim is to advance bicycling and walking as integral elements of the transportation system in Oregon?s communities." Where's the neutrality and objectivity?
>
> In regard to this statement, "Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity within transportation planning," much HIA work does not adequately address social equity and EJ issues. For example, HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias (see "bicycle innovation" above), which often is in tension with the needs of low income communities and communities of color.
>
> As to this, "It also augments community and stakeholder engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee - where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by design," much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed. Another concern with "advisory committees" is that fact that they only provide "advice" which the "planning" entity is not obligated to pay any attention to. A colleague who leads an immigration advocacy group told me a couple of years ago, "I no longer serve on advisory committees because they don't make policy or control anything."
>
> Marc Brenman
> mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:08:33 +0000 (UTC)
> From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
> To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
> Cc: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
> Message-ID:
> <1533380969.350750.1402423713482.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Here's what I said: "HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias...much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed." My comments were focused on the US, where the webinar under discussion is occurring. But prove me wrong in the UK. Quote some HIAs in the UK that discuss the Equality Act (which is under fire in the UK by the Conservative Party) or the equivalent, and environmental justice, and use the languages preferred by demographic groups. This is more than "awareness," since awareness doesn't cure much of anything. I'll be happy to be proved wrong and would love to use those good HIA examples.
>
> In recent work with The City Project in Los Angeles, as funded by the California Endowment, we observed that even those public health organizations and medical professionals who work with minority health disparities rarely engage civil rights law to help solve the challenges. Various professions just seem stuck in their silos. And don't get me started on trying to use epidemiologists as witnesses in environmental just cases. I've never found one who would testify that X environmental insult caused Y adverse effect on a given minority or low income community. They insist upon a scientific standard of proof, which is way higher than the administrative civil rights standard of proof of a preponderance of the evidence.
> Marc Brenman
> mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Jenny Mindell" <j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk>
> To: h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 1:58:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
>
> We may like the concept of evidence-based decision-making but being realistic, political (including planning) decisions are based on a whole range of things.
> So most people now aim for 'evidence-informed decision-making', for which HIA is well-suited.
> It would be daft to think that planners (or others in local, regional or national government) consider only health when making their decisions.
> But the more that the decision-makers are involved with the HIA process, the more likely they are to engage with the recommendations produced.
> And I am very surprised by the statement that public health professionals are unaware of social equity or civil rights. Certainly not the case in the UK. And HIA, as accepted across Europe and I thought worldwide, considers both the health impacts and their distribution across the population.
>
>
> Dr Jennifer Mindell
> Clinical senior lecturer
> Health and Social Surveys Research Group Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health UCL
> 1-19 Torrington Place
> London WC1E 6BT
>
> Tel. 020 7679 1269 (Internal x41269)
> Survey doctor: 07770-537238
> Fax 020 7813 0242
> Email: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
> Web: IRIS web page
>
> Journal of Transport and Health: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC)
> From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
> Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Transportation Planning
> To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
> Message-ID:
> <648017716.8220462.1402144198106.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Who is putting on this webinar? It appears to be something called IBPI. "The Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation is an exciting center for research and learning that is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel. IBPI?s aim is to advance bicycling and walking as integral elements of the transportation system in Oregon?s communities." Where's the neutrality and objectivity?
>
> In regard to this statement, "Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity within transportation planning," much HIA work does not adequately address social equity and EJ issues. For example, HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias (see "bicycle innovation" above), which often is in tension with the needs of low income communities and communities of color.
>
> As to this, "It also augments community and stakeholder engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee - where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by design," much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed. Another concern with "advisory committees" is that fact that they only provide "advice" which the "planning" entity is not obligated to pay any attention to. A colleague who leads an immigration advocacy group told me a couple of years ago, "I no longer serve on advisory committees because they don't make policy or control anything."
>
> Marc Brenman
> mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> H+T--Friends mailing list
> H+T--Friends(a)chrispy.net
> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
>
>
Hi all. I am the presenter of the HIA webinar being discussed. It is hosted by IBPI which is associated with OTREC and Portland State University - my doctoral institution. It is an offshoot of lessons learned from both my doctoral research and time as an HIA practitioner. My doctoral research takes a broad look at transportation planning, so the webinar will not be bike/ped specific. The webinar was initiated because OTREC provided some doctoral support for the research and this seemed like a good avenue to distribute practice-related findings. This particular webinar will address the wide variation within and between disciplines about meaning, definitions, and methods associated with concepts such as health, equity, and engagement; this often result in conflicts between and within professions mid-HIA due to inappropriate expectations of HIA.
Regarding the statements about social and environmental justice... While my doctoral research does not address civil rights law directly, it is a critique of the extent to which HIA proclaims itself participatory and thus protective of community. HIA assumes that there is value in stakeholder/collaborative engagement; it is an offshoot of what is currently termed "health in all policies" approach in public health which suggests any time you can bring public health evidence in for public consideration, decision-makers are more likely to make a more informed and thus healthier public decision. But make no mistake, HIA is generally informed by a stakeholder process engaging in an even broader stakeholder process. Because of that, all the caveats in the literature about power and stakeholder/collaborative processes apply; stakeholder processes are easily co-opted and are highly dependent on representation, timing, and good facilitation to address power structures. HIA, while committed in theory to good process, is still in its infancy in defining and bounding engagement. And community driven HIAs are relatively rare in the U.S.
My research shows that the social justice and community aspects of HIA practice are less a result of stakeholder/participation formats and more a function of explicit HIA values such as a commitment to health equity and broad determinants of health. Through these values, public health professionals are able to identify and advocate for underserved or unorganized communities - particularly in spatially-based plans. It is also important to realize that public health professionals engage in HIAs because they do not see the current NEPA regulatory and federal/state legal structures do not go far enough to protect population health and health equity. And HIA processes and products engage the notion of equity in ways that are currently not exploited in planning and EJ circles - a likely win for vulnerable communities. So HIA may not explicitly address civil rights law (certainly true in most U.S. HIAs), but it engages in the notion of health disparities and thus health, social, and environmental equity.
The dissertation employs a case-study approach; two of the three cases are HIAs that are centered around non-English EJ populations in the U.S. and thus might be of particular interest to some commenters. It is a reasonably interesting read for a dissertation and publically available through OTREC at http://otrec.us/project/715.
Fun to see this being discussed! Hope to have some of you on the webinar on July 16th. http://otrec.us/events/entry/health_impact_assessment_hia_in_transportation…
~Nicole
Nicole Iroz-Elardo, PhD
Portland State University
irozelardo(a)yahoo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: h+t--friends-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of h+t--friends-request(a)chrispy.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 10:00 AM
To: h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
Subject: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 5
Send H+T--Friends mailing list submissions to
h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
h+t--friends-request(a)chrispy.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
h+t--friends-owner(a)chrispy.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of H+T--Friends digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA (Mindell, Jenny)
2. Re: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
(mbrenman001(a)comcast.net)
3. David Ragland Profiled for Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Safe Routes to Schools work (Phyllis ORRICK)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:58:44 +0000
From: "Mindell, Jenny" <j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
To: "h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net" <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Message-ID:
<7354587cd221478c8333e68518d1a139(a)DB3PR01MB331.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
We may like the concept of evidence-based decision-making but being realistic, political (including planning) decisions are based on a whole range of things.
So most people now aim for 'evidence-informed decision-making', for which HIA is well-suited.
It would be daft to think that planners (or others in local, regional or national government) consider only health when making their decisions.
But the more that the decision-makers are involved with the HIA process, the more likely they are to engage with the recommendations produced.
And I am very surprised by the statement that public health professionals are unaware of social equity or civil rights. Certainly not the case in the UK. And HIA, as accepted across Europe and I thought worldwide, considers both the health impacts and their distribution across the population.
Dr Jennifer Mindell
Clinical senior lecturer
Health and Social Surveys Research Group Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health UCL
1-19 Torrington Place
London WC1E 6BT
Tel. 020 7679 1269 (Internal x41269)
Survey doctor: 07770-537238
Fax 020 7813 0242
Email: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
Web: IRIS web page
Journal of Transport and Health: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA)
in Transportation Planning
To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Message-ID:
<648017716.8220462.1402144198106.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Who is putting on this webinar? It appears to be something called IBPI. "The Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation is an exciting center for research and learning that is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel. IBPI?s aim is to advance bicycling and walking as integral elements of the transportation system in Oregon?s communities." Where's the neutrality and objectivity?
In regard to this statement, "Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity within transportation planning," much HIA work does not adequately address social equity and EJ issues. For example, HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias (see "bicycle innovation" above), which often is in tension with the needs of low income communities and communities of color.
As to this, "It also augments community and stakeholder engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee - where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by design," much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed. Another concern with "advisory committees" is that fact that they only provide "advice" which the "planning" entity is not obligated to pay any attention to. A colleague who leads an immigration advocacy group told me a couple of years ago, "I no longer serve on advisory committees because they don't make policy or control anything."
Marc Brenman
mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:08:33 +0000 (UTC)
From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Cc: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
Message-ID:
<1533380969.350750.1402423713482.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Here's what I said: "HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias...much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed." My comments were focused on the US, where the webinar under discussion is occurring. But prove me wrong in the UK. Quote some HIAs in the UK that discuss the Equality Act (which is under fire in the UK by the Conservative Party) or the equivalent, and environmental justice, and use the languages preferred by demographic groups. This is more than "awareness," since awareness doesn't cure much of anything. I'll be happy to be proved wrong and would love to use those good HIA examples.
In recent work with The City Project in Los Angeles, as funded by the California Endowment, we observed that even those public health organizations and medical professionals who work with minority health disparities rarely engage civil rights law to help solve the challenges. Various professions just seem stuck in their silos. And don't get me started on trying to use epidemiologists as witnesses in environmental just cases. I've never found one who would testify that X environmental insult caused Y adverse effect on a given minority or low income community. They insist upon a scientific standard of proof, which is way higher than the administrative civil rights standard of proof of a preponderance of the evidence.
Marc Brenman
mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jenny Mindell" <j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk>
To: h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 1:58:44 AM
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 38, Issue 4 - HIA
We may like the concept of evidence-based decision-making but being realistic, political (including planning) decisions are based on a whole range of things.
So most people now aim for 'evidence-informed decision-making', for which HIA is well-suited.
It would be daft to think that planners (or others in local, regional or national government) consider only health when making their decisions.
But the more that the decision-makers are involved with the HIA process, the more likely they are to engage with the recommendations produced.
And I am very surprised by the statement that public health professionals are unaware of social equity or civil rights. Certainly not the case in the UK. And HIA, as accepted across Europe and I thought worldwide, considers both the health impacts and their distribution across the population.
Dr Jennifer Mindell
Clinical senior lecturer
Health and Social Surveys Research Group Research Department of Epidemiology and Public Health UCL
1-19 Torrington Place
London WC1E 6BT
Tel. 020 7679 1269 (Internal x41269)
Survey doctor: 07770-537238
Fax 020 7813 0242
Email: j.mindell(a)ucl.ac.uk
Web: IRIS web page
Journal of Transport and Health: www.elsevier.com/locate/jth
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 12:29:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
Subject: Re: [H+T--Friends] webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Transportation Planning
To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Message-ID:
<648017716.8220462.1402144198106.JavaMail.root(a)comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Who is putting on this webinar? It appears to be something called IBPI. "The Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation is an exciting center for research and learning that is focused on bicycle and pedestrian travel. IBPI?s aim is to advance bicycling and walking as integral elements of the transportation system in Oregon?s communities." Where's the neutrality and objectivity?
In regard to this statement, "Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity within transportation planning," much HIA work does not adequately address social equity and EJ issues. For example, HIA's rarely address Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the environmental justice executive order. They rarely contain legal concepts at all. HIA's are usually conducted by public health people, who have no background in social equity or civil rights. They often perform with an environmentalist bias (see "bicycle innovation" above), which often is in tension with the needs of low income communities and communities of color.
As to this, "It also augments community and stakeholder engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee - where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by design," much HIA work is conducted solely in English, and the limited English proficiency needs of various demographic groups are not addressed. Another concern with "advisory committees" is that fact that they only provide "advice" which the "planning" entity is not obligated to pay any attention to. A colleague who leads an immigration advocacy group told me a couple of years ago, "I no longer serve on advisory committees because they don't make policy or control anything."
Marc Brenman
mbrenman001(a)comcast.net
_______________________________________________
H+T--Friends mailing list
H+T--Friends(a)chrispy.net
https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
Hi all,
Here is an item with link to a lengthy profile of SafeTREC Director David
Ragland and our team research on health and safety effects of Safe Routes
to School.
Best,
Phyllis
http://safetrec.berkeley.edu/content/david-ragland-rwj-profile
SafeTREC's David Ragland Profiled by RWJ's Active Living Program
In an article titled "Safe Routes to School Examined: How Structural
Changes Around Schools Affect Children's Mobility and Safety: A Profile of
Active Living Research Investigator David R. Ragland, PhD, MPH," the Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation's Active Living Research program discusses the
origins of SafeTREC director and founder David Ragland's work in traffic
safety in general and his and SafeTREC researchers' series of studies
evaluating various effects of Safe Routes to School projects, including:
- Safe Routes to School Safety & Mobility Analysis
<http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5455454c>
- Ten Years Later: Examining the Long-Term Impact of the California Safe
Routes to School Program
<http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/8m59g6vx> (presented
at TRB 2014 Annual Meeting)
Links
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Profiles David Ragland for Safe Routes to
School
<http://www.rwjf.org/en/about-rwjf/newsroom/newsroom-content/2014/06/safe-ro…>
--
Phyllis Orrick
Communications Director
Safe Transportation Research and Education Center
<http://www.safetrec.berkeley.edu/> (SafeTREC)
2614 Dwight Way
UC Berkeley
Berkeley CA 94720-7374
510-643-1779
@transsafe <https://twitter.com/#%21/transsafe>
@trbhealth <https://twitter.com/#%21/trbhealth>
Skype: pmorrick
A Free webinar on Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Transportation
Planning: What to Expect From Planning and Public Health Stakeholders is
planned for Wednesday, July 16, 2014 from 10:00 AM - 11:15 AM PST. Details
are below.
Register online at
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1599395052189440513.
Health impact assessment (HIA) has emerged in the U.S. as a promising way
to increase social and environmental justice by addressing health equity
within transportation planning. HIA seeks to augment the information base
upon which public decisions are made. It does so through a
multi-disciplinary analysis of how the project or plan impacts various
social determinants of health. It also augments community and stakeholder
engagement by providing a forum - usually through an advisory committee -
where stakeholders can identify and deliberate about health interests
related to the target plan. While HIA advisory committees are diverse by
design, those managing HIA processes are often surprised at the differences
between and within both the planning and transportation fields.
This webinar reviews stakeholder engagement strategies common to HIA. It
compares and contrasts the values, expectations, and methodologies that
various types of planning and public health professionals often bring to
the table. Finally, it identifies best practices for stakeholder
engagement in HIA to maximize the collaborative nature of HIA.
Continuing Education Credits: This 60-minute webinar provides one hour of
training which equals 1 CM or 1 PDH. IBPI applies to the AICP for
Certification Maintenance credit for each webinar. We will provide an
attendance certificate to those who document their professional development
hours.
Configuration: The webinar will be administered through GoToWebinar. The
room will be opened 30 minutes before the start of the webinar.
hi all -
I wasn't sure if I could send the paper to the entire listserv. I am happy to share it if you want a copy, please contact me.
Marc pointed out that I wouldn't have found the features he mentioned (e.g. visitability, universal design) b/c my search terms wouldn't have uncovered these sorts of studies. Indeed, we were focused more on street design and public place (e.g. mixed used) rather than home / building features.
Irene
Irene H. Yen, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Associate Professor
Division of General Internal Medicine
Department of Medicine
University of California, San Francisco
Associate Director, Experiential Learning, Health & Society Pathway
3333 California Street, Suite 335
Box 0856
San Francisco, CA 94143-0856 [for FedEx - use 94118]
(415) 502 8291 (fax)
http://dgim.ucsf.edu/about/yen.html
******************************************************************
EMAIL ADDRESS: irene.yen(a)ucsf.edu
******************************************************************
Dear colleagues,
We are excited to announce that registration is now open for the San Francisco Department of Public Health's annual Health Impact Assessment Practitioners' Training (July 14-17, 2014) http://www.sfhealthequity.org/services/hia-training.
Register early at the link http://bit.ly/1mhK7lh. The deadline for applications is June 19 (Thu).
What is Health Impact Assessment?
Health impact assessment (HIA) is most often defined as "a combination of procedures, methods and tools by which a policy, program or project may be judged as to its potential effects on the health of a population, and the distribution of those effects within the population" (World Health Organization, 1999).
The field of HIA and the process of getting health into decision-making continues to evolve and grow http://www.healthimpactproject.org/hia/us
How will you and your team enhance skill sets, leverage big data, meaningfully engage communities, and have collective impact? HIA is one of many tools that may be considered for health-protective policy and action.
*************************************************************
About the SFDPH HIA Training
What:
7th Annual Health Impact Assessment Practitioners Summer Training Course (deadline is June 19th)
Where:
TCE Oakland Conference Center, 1111 Broadway, 7th Floor, Oakland, CA
When:
July 14-17, 2014 (attendance all four days is mandatory)
Instructors:
HIA practitioners at the San Francisco Department of Public Health and community, academic, and local government partners
Cost:
$960 (includes the cost of course materials, breakfast and lunch; accommodations and travel not included). We are working to raise funds to support attendance of organizations facing financial hardship. We STRONGLY encourage applications from community-based organizations who are actively planning, considering, or doing HIA to apply.
Feel free to contact me at 415-252-3961<tel:415-252-3961> if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Tim Choi
--
Tim Choi, MPH -- Health Impact Assessment Specialist
Environmental Health Branch -- Population Health Division
San Francisco Department of Public Health
W: http://www.sfhealthequity.org<http://www.sfhealthequity.org/>
P: 415-252-3961
E: tim.choi(a)sfdph.org