1. Managing Quality Of Life For Communities Deryk Van Brunt, Dr.PH Clinical Professor, UC Berkeley President, Healthy Communities Foundation Chairman, eMedicine

2. — Background — The Healthy Communities Foundation  Non-profit organization  Affiliated with UC Berkeley  Mission: to “put a face on public health,” and engage all stakeholders in improving quality of life in communities, via new information systems  Build upon the Healthy Cities movement  Funding from Power Bar  Deployment ready August 2004  Seeking pilot communities, support and partners

3. The Problem There is no single view or system that (a) shows the status of quality of life in each community, (b) provides access to lists of what other communities have tried to improve health, and (c) provides an online decision-making environment for a community to make positive, informed change based on consistently good quality data. There is no single view or system that (a) shows the status of quality of life in each community, (b) provides access to lists of what other communities have tried to improve health, and (c) provides an online decision-making environment for a community to make positive, informed change based on consistently good quality data.  Access a “dashboard” of quality of life indicators  Identify programs that have worked elsewhere (childhood obesity, smoking cessation, infant mortality, water quality, traffic congestion, employment programs, safety programs, etc.)  Understand how to operationalize and better co-ordinate programs in your community  Communicate programs and findings with the public  Help people get involved and foster more social entrepreneurs  Integrate with the health care delivery system

4. Determinants Of Health  Medical Care10%  Genetics20%  Environment20%  Lifestyle50%

5. Stakeholders Are Ready To Engage: The Internet  137 million American adults online  82 million search for health information (62%)  Health is #2 most trafficked subject  82% have searched for family and friends  92% said searches were useful  68% said information impacted decisions  16% said web had major impact on decisions  28% said web affected their decision to visit a physician  90% want to communicate with their doctor online (50% would influence choice of Plan)  83% said it is important that they can get more information online than from other sources  Where is the system that provides the local view into quality of life and civic engagement? ING Baring Furman Selz LLC Report, Pew Internet and American Life Project, Feb. 2001 & May 2002, CIA Worldfacts 2003

6. HC Network: Design Criteria  Useful to community stakeholders o Policy makers o Researchers and providers of services o General Public  Template; Scalable o Track National and State indicator databases o Provide local view for each community o Allow for use at City, County, State, National and International levels  Support the decision making process of the community and be engaging o “Dashboard” of quality of life indicators o Database of best and promising practices o Facilitate communication, collaboration and change

7. — Architecture — Healthy Community Network Users Healthy Community Network (local view) Centralized Servers, Content & Applications Local Coalition Governance & Content City Government Local Hospitals, Public Health Non- profits Schools, Police, Local Services, etc. Community Direct Participation

8. Conclusion Opportunity to improve tracking of quality of life, communication, participation and informed decision making in every community, leading to improving determinants of health, improving access to services & volunteerism, and reducing unnecessary costs.  Healthy Communities Network is ready for deployment beginning August 2004  Healthy Communities Foundation and UC Berkeley seek 3 to 5 communities and associated funding to pilot the system