HEALTH BENEFITS OF VILLAGE MEMBERSHIP SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 Andrew E. Scharlach, PhD Carrie Graham, PhD, MGS Center for the Advanced Studies of Aging Services School of Social Welfare University of California, Berkeley

UC Berkeley Villages Project  Village organizational development Village characteristics and types Factors associated with growth and sustainability  Cost-effectiveness  Challenges and best practices  Evaluation of Village program impacts  Service use  Member satisfaction  Physical and social well-being  Ability to age in place

California Villages Study  Outcomes evaluation  Surveys of current Village members (n = 445)  Pre-post study of new Village members (n < 337)  Process evaluation  Village programs and services  Growth and sustainability  Challenges and best practices  Funded by the Archstone Foundation  Oct 2011 – Sept 2014

Potential Impacts of the Village Model  Service Access  Needs met  Ability to access needed services  Service affordability  Community-Building  Social engagement  Social support  Capacity-Building  Individual functioning Physical and psychosocial well-being Reduced likelihood of relocation  Service delivery system Availability, accessibility, affordability, appropriateness

Logic Model Village Social Engagement Social Activities Educational Activities Transportation Assistance and Support Companionship Housekeeping Home maintenance Safety modification Wellness/Advocacy Care coordination/advocacy Care management Medical transport Civic Engagement Volunteering Participating in governance Healthy Aging Access to services Awareness of services Use of services Getting the care you need when you need it Health/Well-being Quality of life Well being Health Self efficacy Confidence with self care Confidence with home care Confidence aging in place Social engagement Increased social connections Increased participation Civic engagement Reduced isolation

Types of Direct Outcomes  Personal care needs met  Homemaker needs met  Household chore needs met  Environmental hazards removed  Social support  Social activity/interaction/engagement  Mobility (ability to get where one wants/needs to go)

Types of Secondary Health Outcomes  Health  Disease management  Falls  More appropriate/effective use of health services  Hospital use  ER visits, Inpatient days  Psychological well-being/Quality of life  Safety and security  Decreased use of residential care

Impact on Access to Care/Services  80.8% say they are more likely to know how to get assistance when they need it  75.9% say they know more about community services  40.5% say they use community services more Positive correlation between number of services used and improved access to care (r=.394, p=.000)

Impact on Health and Well-Being  39.3% feel healthier than they used to  34.4% feel happier than they used to  28% are more likely to get the medical care they need, when they need it

Some Examples of Health Programs  Health and physical fitness classes  “Brain fitness” classes  Falls prevention/ hazard assessment programs  Personal health info flashdrive (keychain)  Personal care plans  Health fairs  Care transition programs

Health Care Partnerships: Challenges and Opportunities  CMMS Innovation Opportunities  ACOs (social care + medical care = health care)  Joint programs (e.g., health fairs)  Care transition programs  Referrals  LTC insurance benefits  Corporate social responsibility

Andrew Scharlach, PhD Center for the Advanced Study of Aging Services UC Berkeley For further information, contact: