Lived Advisory Council Meeting Notes
Main Topics Discussed
1. Review & Expansion of NORC (Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities) Data Points
a) Further Data Sources Suggested:
- Community Health Board public engagement survey data—Martin to confirm whether incorporated.
- Acting Collectively project: Findings on issues like grief and chronic pain, with reports from Richmond and two other counties already provided/connected.
- Engage Nova Scotia Quality of Life Data: While noted as currently outdated, next survey launches Fall 2025, and previous data may still provide relevant insight.
2. NORC Maps: Technical Understanding & Interpretation
a) Legend & Granularity Issues:
- Clarified that each “dissemination area” on maps is based on populations of about 700 individuals, not geographic or culturally defined communities.
- These areas grouped by population, not necessarily matching community boundaries (“community identity” not reflected in data divisions). Instead, they follow infrastructure like roads.
b) Challenges Raised:
i. Population data may obscure distinct cultural or practical differences in “real” communities (e.g., Isle Madame, River Bourgeois).
ii. Need for consideration of population density and rurality.
3. Layering Service Asset Maps onto NORC Data
a) Proposed Approach:
- Overlay maps with resource assets to get a clearer view of community structure and service availability.
- Suggestions for layers:
- Healthcare and service assets (transportation, grocery stores, cell service coverage, senior clubs/organizations, telehealth sites)
- Infrastructure assets (churches, community halls, libraries, post offices)
- Mobile, home, and visiting services (occupational therapy, physiotherapy, nurses/secondary care, visiting clinics)
- Community network nodes (formal & informal groups)
b) Data Collection in Progress:
i. Team of social work research assistants actively mapping & layering these assets.
ii. Solange’s recent Cheticamp fieldwork (public observations) to be shared as an example.
4. Measurement of Social Capital & Informal Networks
a) Key Issue: Strong emphasis on the invisible role of informal, neighborly help and local social capital in supporting older adults.
b) Challenge: Formal mapping and quantification of such networks is complex, but seen as integral to community health/aging in place.
c) Ideas: Investigating possible social capital indicators; learning from “healthy neighborhoods” models in BC and local senior safety network pilots.
Action Items
1. Service Mapping
- Continue mapping service assets (health, social, infrastructure) across all NORC regions, integrating suggestions (transport, telecommunications, home-based care, etc.).
- Share Cheticamp fieldwork on service mapping at future meeting.
- Celeste to share Richmond County service inventory for team incorporation.
2. Data Collection & Integration
- Martin to confirm if Community Health Board survey data is integrated; Celeste to send reminder in the chat.
- Compile findings and major insights from the Acting Collectively project for inclusion as data points.
- Review and consider data from Engage Nova Scotia, including
3. Community Outreach Model Brainstorm
Develop different engagement strategies:
- Work through trusted local contacts/organizations.
- Consider informal sign-up at local events/meetings.
- Plan targeted door-to-door outreach for isolated areas.
- Investigate partnerships with local community TV.
4. Investigate Social Capital Measurement
- Investigate frameworks/tools for quantifying or mapping informal social support networks (“neighborliness”), possibly drawing from established “healthy neighborhoods” concepts.
- Identify practical indicators for inclusion in current and future analyses.
5. Community Outreach and Engagement Strategy
a) Consent, Trust, and Buy-in:
i. Worry about “invading” communities without suitable permission or buy-in.
ii. Discussion questioned whether application approach or municipality involvement was best.
iii. Recognized necessity of trusted local intermediaries (e.g., community organization contacts, known “influencers” like Celeste for Richmond County).
iv. Acknowledged diversity in community leadership structures; not all communities have formal or informal leaders.
b) Reaching the Most Isolated:
i. Strategies such as targeted outreach (door-to-door), leveraging local media (e.g., Telile TV), informal sign-up at clubs, and working with existing points of trust were discussed.
ii. Caution: groups most in need may not be the most organized or vocal, so strategies may need to differ depending on local capacity and connectivity.