46
1 alPHa UPDATE Low Risk Alcohol Drinking Guidelines PH Work Group December 10, 2014
1
alPHa UPDATE
Low Risk Alcohol Drinking Guidelines PH Work GroupDecember 10, 2014
2
Related Activity
June 2013-Healthy Communities Fund (HCF) Program Stream
- alPHa submitted proposal that included an element of promoting the LRADGs to low-income persons and youth working in food establishments
- Proposal was not successful
3
Related Activity continued
2014-Government expansion of availability of alcohol
- VQA Wine sales at farmers markets- COMOH submission to Regulatory Registry
- LCBO Express stores in large grocery outlets- COMOH Letter to Minister of Finance
-COMOH requested the removal of the related performance indicator
- Percent of population (19+) that exceeds the low-risk drinking guidelines
4
LRADGResource Sharing Web Page
5
LRADGResource Sharing Web Page
6
Questions?
CAMH presentation to the Low-Risk Alcohol Drinking Guidelines - Public Health Working Group (LRADG-PHWG)
Tamar MeyerCAMH Health Promotion Resource Centre
Provincial System Support Program
December 10, 2014
+
CAMH Research – 2013 Monitor8
http://www.camh.ca/en/research/news_and_publications/CAMH%20Monitor/CAMH_Monitor_eReport_2013_Final.pdf
+
Mock-up (Front) 10
+
Mock-up (Back) 11
LRADG- RYD SUB-GROUP Laura Morelli – Waterloo Public Health
Kristy McBeth – Windsor Essex County Health Unit
Annette Hoyles – Perth district Health Unit
Brenda Marshall – North bay Parry Sound District Health Unit
Nancy Nichols – Brant County Health Unit
Wendy World – Ministry of Health
Janet Moorhead-Cassidy – Hastings and Prince Edward Counties Health Unit
Jason LeMar – Public Health Ontario
Items for Discussion • Role of this group • Implementation Plan • Action plan • Evaluation Plan • Mini Business Case
• Purpose • Expected Outcomes • Timelines / Milestones• Risks to Implementation • Partners • Other
Role of the Group • To develop an implementation plan that could be used by
all 36 PHU’s to promote the Rethink your Drinking Campaign over the same time period creating consistency and synergy in provincial messages around the LDRG
Implementation Plan • Elements of the Implementation Plan would be similar
across the province • A suite of items would be available to all PHU’s • PHU’s would use this as a foundation to develop a local
strategy suited for their needs
Implementation Plan • Annette has provided the South West Implementation
plan
• This group will review and discuss at further meetings
Action Plan
Stream 1 – 6 month plan to start on July 1st 2015
Stream 2 – 12 month plan to start on January 1st 2016
Evaluation Plan
Some key questions that need to be addressed are below in priority sequence: • Is the LRADG-PHWG on board to do an evaluation?
• If the answer is yes, will the LRADG-PHWG have an evaluation sub-committee?
• If there is a sub-committee, how will the work progress?
Mini Business Case Purpose: Disseminate information about alcohol-related harms in a timely and coordinated manner at a provincial level
Target Audience: Adults 19+
Expected Outcomes: • Consistent messaging used by Ontario public health units
and key provincial organizations
• Increased awareness of alcohol-related harms and ways in which to reduce consumption
• Development of a toolkit for organizations to deliver the Rethink your Drinking campaign
Business Case continued
Timelines / Milestones: • Development of an implementation plan• Development of a RYD toolkit• Development of an evaluation plan• Determine a host website / digital hub • July 1, 2015 – start of 6 month RYD campaign• January 1, 2016 – start of 12 month RYD campaign• Completion of evaluation
Business Case continued
Risks to Implementation: • Lack of uptake from public health units or other
organizations• Limited time and/or money to update the RYD website• Broad audience may hinder program from a specific
population reach.
Business Case continued
Partners and Community engagement identified in the LDCP document
Post secondary institutions, Local police services, CAMH, PHO, CMHA, OMA
Other: RYD website, Incorporate social media into toolkit
Where we go next • Open for discussion
LRADG PH WG: Environmental Scan – sub-groupAmy Hlaing, York RegionDaphne Mayer, KFL&A Public HealthSarah Milne, Grey Bruce Health UnitRoslyn Ralph, Halton Region Health Dept.
Environmental Scan
Purpose: To inform the development of
provincial level alcohol public awareness programming that provides PHU units with aligned messages and activities
Environmental scan objectives:
1. To identify PHU awareness communications activities related to alcohol and related harms, including but not limited to LRADG activities
2. To establish relationships and key contacts that will continue to provide information about initiatives at the local, regional and provincial levels
3. To create a scanning process that will continue to provide the MoHLTC with timely information
Questions for the group...
Modify 2013 ES questionnaire? How will information be used? What timeframe are we capturing? Dissemination strategy? Increases
RR MOHs, 2013 contact Electronic, interview,
MPH student availability?
Draft timeline
Activity Dates Responsibility
Finalize ES objectives Dec 12, 2014 ES sub group
Draft questionnaire Jan 30, 2015 ES sub group
Final review of questionnaire Feb 20, 2015 PHU epidemiologist (TBD)
Survey dissemination March 2015 MoHLTC
Data analysis & report generation
Apr-Jun 2015 TBD
Presentation of results Jun 26, 2015 ES sub group
Provincial Municipal Alcohol Policy (MAP) Scan: Overview and Results
On behalf of the LRADG Public Health Working Group
Secretariat support by Public Health Ontario
December 10th, 2014
29
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Background
• The purpose of this environmental scan is to gather information about the implementation of MAPs throughout the province of Ontario.
• This work is intended to help support the Ontario public health accountability agreement indicator for substance misuse and this will inform future initiatives.
30
August• 2 meetings with MOHLTC to
determine scope
September• Survey developed on
FluidSurveys
October
• Survey disseminated : Oct. 24th
• Responses collected: Oct. 27th
• Presentation: Oct. 30th
Provincial MAP Scan SurveyTimeline
31
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Survey demographics
• 32 / 36 PHU’s completed the survey
• Response rate = 88.89%
• All regions of Ontario were well-represented
32
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Survey questions
• Information on the respondent:• How many years of experience do you have in public health?
• What department best represents where you work?
• How many people are on your team?
33
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Survey questions• What PHU do you belong to? (branching question)
• What is the status of the MAP?
• When was the MAP implemented?
• When was the MAP revised?
• Are you able to send a copy of the MAP?
• If you send a copy of the MAP can it be shared externally for educational purposes?
• Has the MAP been evaluated?
• Was the PHU involved in MAP development?
34
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Survey questions - qualitative
• Describe successes (internal and external to your health unit) in MAP development to-date (what worked well, unplanned spinoffs and/or benefits, new opportunities, etc.) from your perspective.
• Describe challenges in MAP development to-date (identify barriers, unanticipated issues, implementation hurdles, etc.) from you perspective.
• Describe the types of community reaction/feedback to-date, e.g. through media, community partners, etc.
35
Survey Results
MAP ap
prove
d
In development
No MAP
Unknown
0
50
100
150
200
250 236
8
86 86
What is the status of the MAP?
Number of municipali-ties
36
Survey Results
37
Yes No Unknown0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
41
67
128
Has the MAP been evaluated?
MA
Ps a
ppro
ved
Survey Results
38
Yes No Unknown0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
122
57 57
Was the PHU involved in MAP devel-opment?
MA
Ps a
ppro
ved
Qualitative Results
Describe successes (internal and external to your health unit) in MAP development to-date (what worked well, unplanned spinoffs and/or benefits, new opportunities, etc.) from your perspective.
39
Qualitative ResultsThemes:
• Public health unit involvement
• Public health units collaborated with: • municipalities; various internal departments; other public health units;
credible partners
• The use of MAP templates, models, resources, guides and fact sheets
• PHU’s conducted MAP/community workshops, situational assessment for the status of MAPs, hosted county-wide information session and educational events
• Consulted experts for support
• Conducted internal MAP scans
• Municipalities interested on the issue of liability 40
Qualitative Results
Describe challenges in MAP development to-date (identify barriers, unanticipated issues, implementation hurdles, etc.) from you perspective.
41
Qualitative ResultsThemes:
• Cost/benefit of selling alcohol at sporting facilities; loss of revenue
• Working with multiple municipalities, geographical challenges
• Competing priorities with other public health topics
• Lack of training/ knowledge by PHU and municipal staff; staff turnover
• Lack of cooperation from municipalities
• Lack of evidence supporting MAPs
• Lobbying from alcohol industry and energy drink manufacturers
• Outdated resources; not enough external support42
Qualitative Results
Describe the types of community reaction/feedback to-date, e.g. through media, community partners, etc.
43
Themes:
• Not known/no community reaction
• Positive feedback
• Negative reaction from community
• Little knowledge in the community on MAPs
Provincial MAP Scan Survey
Limitations
• Short turnaround time for respondents to complete the survey
• Length of survey – dependent on the number of municipalities under a PHU
• Accuracy of responses
• Missing data and unknowns
• Time of year the survey was sent (i.e. during municipal elections)
44
December • In-depth analysis of responses
January • Develop and present report
Provincial MAP Scan SurveyNext Steps
45
Questions
46
