Use of Interactive Voice Response technology in collecting community data: Lessons from LiveWell Colorado Tristan Sanders BA, Diane K King PhD, Bonnie A Leeman-Castillo PhD, Sophia R Newcomer MPH and Lisa T Harner MA Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, CO Project Background  LiveWell Colorado’s (LWCO) vision: All Coloradoans enjoy a lifestyle that includes healthy eating and active living (HEAL)  LWCO’s community grants program: funds underserved communities for 7 years to implement HEAL policies, programs and environmental changes  IVR technology: was used to collect LWCO community data on key HEAL outcomes, a novel approach to collecting community level data Methods 1. Measure: survey administered via IVR in 17 communities from Core survey questions addressed physical activity, fruit and vegetable consumption, health profiles, and demographics 2. Sampling: 3,000 addresses with landline telephone numbers are selected per community 3. Selected households receive a postcard announcing survey and option to call- in or opt out 4. Households are called a total of 7 times over one month (plus limited voic messages) 5. Survey participation promoted in variety of ways (ads, flyers, incentives) Conclusions : The ability to identify and survey residents within specific boundaries (census tracts) of the community where changes are taking place is a unique advantage of using IVR. Analysis of respondent characteristics indicates a need to further address sampling strategies, survey design and recruitment to reduce non-response bias. This project is supported by LiveWell Colorado and the Kaiser Permanente Community Benefit and Government Relations Department Purpose  Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology has potential to fill a data gap for community level change by surveying at the neighborhood (census tract) level  We describe advantages and limitations of using IVR technology for collecting community-level health data  BRFSS provides data by county and, in Colorado, by strategically designed regions Results  N= 11,017 Colorado LiveWell community residents  81% female  11% Hispanic  Respondents were of older age (50% > 55)  Response rates by community ranged from about 8% to 21%  Statistical techniques (data weighting) address non- response bias, but small sample sizes are problematic Table 1. Calculated BMI Category (Sample Results) Percent of respondents that are Overweight/Obese UnweightedWeighted N=257N=373N=404N=257N=373N= %48.8%52%52.3%50.1%52.3%  LWCO IVR survey targets specific census tracts for data capture and reporting Advantages  Data are community specific (by census tract)  Survey method is efficient requiring few financial and personnel resources as compared to traditional phone surveys  Survey is offered in English and Spanish Limitations  Non-coverage bias: only people with landline phone numbers are contacted  Sociodemographic characteristics of respondents compared with Census data indicate non-response bias