Village Programs: Helping Older Adults Age in Place Virginia Blueprint for Livable Communities Hearing May 9, 2014 Candace Baldwin Director of Strategy, Aging in Community

Why is the Village Model the Right Model Now?

Because there are more people age 65 and older than in any time in our history. US Residents Over Age 65: In 2006 there were 37 million In 2030 there will be 71.5 million By 2025, 25% of Virginia population will be 60+ Age Wave Opportunities 71.5 MILLION

Because people over age 85 are the fastest growing segment of the US population.

Because 85% of people age 45 and older say they want to age in their own homes and communities.

Because we cannot build enough senior communities and retirement facilities to house all of us. It would take too long and cost too much.

Cross Sector Coordination as a Foundation ElementFeatures Basic Needs -- Safe, Accessible, and Affordable  Accessible and affordable housing and community areas  Provides information about services  Fosters safety Community Engagement  Fosters meaningful connections  Promotes active community engagement  Opportunities for paid or volunteer work Health and Well Being  Facilitates access to medical and social services  Promotes health behaviors  Supports community activities that enhance well being Independence and Autonomy  Mobilizes in-home supports and services  Coordinates or offers transportation  Supports family and other caregivers

New Way to Define Social Networking Research beginning to identify importance of social connections on health outcomes Aging in community best chance to remain connected Aging in Community vs. Aging in Place ACA – focus on care and systems coordination – home and community based services

Village Model

Village Model has a Set of Guiding Principles Self-governing, self-supporting, grassroots membership-based organizations Consolidate and coordinate services to members Create innovative strategic partnerships that leverage existing community resources and do not duplicate existing services Holistic, person-centered, and consumer-driven Promote volunteerism, civic engagement, and intergenerational connections

Village Provides the Mechanism to Support Aging in Community 11 Local Leadership Development Health and Wellness Livable, Age Friendly Community Economic and Community Development Village Builds Strong Communities Platform for local policy/program innovation Model for successful aging Support Individuals to reach highest potential Resources to stimulate growth

Villages are Unique to the Communities they Serve 12 Villages vary the organization to reflect the needs and leverage available resources Core services address gaps and preference Funded through membership fees and fundraising from private sources Nearly all Villages offer options for both individual or household membership Average age of Village member is between 74 years of age

Village Model is about Individuals Sense of Belonging – A place where I can be myself Mutual Support – A place where I can give and get support Greater Influence – High level of self efficacy and worth Exploration – A place where I can explore new ideas/activities

Villages Foster a Strong Sense of Community Combination of paid staff, volunteers and community-based partnerships: – Facilitate connection to existing community services – Assist members to navigate medical, non- medical and social support needs – Create social networks and expand social capital to support aging in community 51% of Village members volunteer for their Village – truly “neighbor helping neighbor ”

Member Benefits include a Wide Range of Services Unique to individual Village based upon community needs Services provided by volunteers: – Transportation – Social events and exercise classes – Caregiver support – Friendly visitor/Respite – Healthcare/Medical advocacy – Care transition coordination Discounted services provided by providers and community partners – Transportation – In-home technologies – Home maintenance/repair – Personal/Home care

Connecting Local Innovations with National Priorities Villages partnering to reduce hospital readmissions and increase patient engagement Care transitions - Newton at Home – Newton, MA – Key to reducing hospital readmissions – Measuring impact of Village Patient Readiness/Engagement - Avenidas Village – Palo Alto, CA – Patients - improved their understanding of the goals and priorities of the visit – Physicians - helped them address specific patient concerns and increased satisfaction with quality of visit “This is a very simple but powerful tool, which allows us to provide better care, and improve patient satisfaction” – PAMF Physician

Village to Village Network

Village to Village Network is Critical to Replication VtV Network Objectives – Promote Village model – Assist new, emerging and established Villages – Gather feedback on how member benefits and programs can be revised to meet needs of individual Villages – Research and evaluate impact of Villages on a number of social and health factors Current membership organizations from across the country in 40 states and 4 countries

145 Villages Open and Over 120 Communities in Development Phase District of Columbia Existing Villages (124 total open and operating) Source: Information on Village activity known and reported to the Village to Village Network, LLC as of 01/2014 Communities Engaged in Village

Villages Movement in Virginia 20 Open Villages – At Home Alexandria – Arlington Neighborhood Villages – Clifton Fairfax Station – Colonial Beach Village – Lake Barcroft Village – McLean Community Village – Mt. Vernon at Home – Park View Village – The Fan Village (Richmond) Villages in Development – C-Ville Village (Charlottesville) – Greenwood Village (Charlottesville) – Neighbor to Neighbor Village (Blacksburg) – Vertical Village – VOA (Arlington)

Village Impact: Research Findings from University of California Berkeley

Social Impacts of Village Membership – 79% know more people than they used to – 60% feel more connected with other people – 49% participate in activities and events more – 41% feel less lonely – 37% leave their home more than they used to Information derived from University of California Berkeley Evaluation of CA Villages (2013)

Well-Being Impacts 51% report improved quality of life 46% say they are happier 35% say their health is better Information derived from University of California Berkeley Evaluation of CA Villages (2013)

Service Access Impacts Access 82% are more likely to know how to get assistance when they need it 77% know more about community services 44% use community services more Efficacy 29% have an easier time taking care of home 25% have an easier time taking care of themselves Aging in Place 77% feel they are more likely to be able to stay in their own homes as they get older Information derived from University of California Berkeley Evaluation of CA Villages (2013)

Potential Community Impacts 38% of Villages work on making their community more aging-friendly 22% are engaged in political advocacy 10% work on improvements in the built environment 6% sponsor public educational events Information derived from University of California Berkeley Evaluation of CA Villages (2013)

Creating a Vision of Comprehensive Aging Services Individuals and Caregivers Better health, prevention and wellness through social engagement outlets Individualism + active lifestyle = not “old” Impact on connection of health and social support Increase awareness and ability to navigate system Local and Community Providers Identify and champion individual preference Break up the ‘medical’ model Identify and embrace connection of social and health interventions

THANK YOU. For More Information Candace Baldwin Director of Strategy, Aging in Community