Interview guide : a guide to interviewing persons with developmental disabilities to obtain information for the development of community based services and supports.

"Funded through a grant from the Illinois Planning Council on Development Disabilities.

The young women's network: A case study in community development

While young women have been found to be at additional risk for psychological morbidity after a breast cancer diagnosis, their specific needs in relation to support are not well described. A community development approach was utilized to develop the Young Women's Network, a peer support programme for young women who have been diagnosed with breast cancer that addresses their specific psychological and social needs, Central to this approach was the key role of the target group in both the definition of the problem and the generation of the solutions. This article describes the steps involved in developing this programme and guidelines for health professionals and community members who may wish to replicate either the Young Women's Network or this particular approach to programme development. Copyright (C), 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

IPH response to DSD Urban Regeneration and Community Development Policy Framework Consultation

The Urban Regeneration and Community Development Policy Framework for Northern Ireland sets out for DSD and its partners, clear priorities for urban regeneration and community development programmes, both before and after the operational responsibility for these is transferred to councils under the reform of local government. Four policy objectives have been developed, which will focus on the underlying structural problems in urban areas and also help strengthen community development throughout Northern Ireland. The policy objectives are as follows: Policy Objective 1 – To tackle area-based deprivation: Policy Objective 2 – To strengthen the competitiveness of our towns and cities: Policy Objective 3 – To improve linkages between areas of need and areas of opportunity: and Policy Objective 4 –To develop more cohesive and engaged communities. Key points from IPH response Urban regeneration and community development provide a basis for addressing the social determinants of health and reducing inequalities in health. This policy framework presents an opportunity for coherence and complementarity with ‘Fit and Well - Changing Lives’ as part of government’s overall approach to tackling health inequalities. It is now well established that a focus on early years’ interventions and family support services yields significant returns, so prioritising action in these areas is essential. Defined action plans on child poverty are essential if this policy framework is to make a real and lasting difference in deprived urban areas. Development of the environmental infrastructure to improve health in deprived areas should be supported by well-planned monitoring and evaluation. Linking the policy framework to economic development and local community plans will enhance effectiveness in the areas of education, job creation, commercial investment and access to services, which in turn are critical for the economic growth and stability of urban communities. Community profile data and health intelligence (as available through IPH Health Well) could usefully inform central and local government in terms of resource allocation and targeted service delivery.

Community Development Health Network

The Community Development and Health Network (CDHN) aim to end health inequalities using a community development approach - campaigning, influencing policy and developing best practice work which shows that communities, both geographical and of interest & identity, can define their own health needs and design and implement preventative and radical solutions. It believes that health is affected by more than access to health services, individual lifestyle choices and our own genetic make-up. These other factors can include poverty, the environment, education, living and working conditions, housing, access to food and social and community networks. This resource is part of the Public Health Advocacy Website Collection.

Shared decision-making in mental health care : a user perspective on decisional needs in community-based services

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is an emergent research topic in the field of mental health care and is considered to be a central component of a recovery-oriented system. Despite the evidence suggesting the benefits of this change in the power relationship between users and practitioners, the method has not been widely implemented in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate decisional and information needs among users with mental illness as a prerequisite for the development of a decision support tool aimed at supporting SDM in community-based mental health services in Sweden. METHODS: Three semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with 22 adult users with mental illness. The transcribed interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis. This method was used to develop an in-depth understanding of the decisional process as well as to validate and conceptually extend Elwyn et al.'s model of SDM. RESULTS: The model Elwyn et al. have created for SDM in somatic care fits well for mental health services, both in terms of process and content. However, the results also suggest an extension of the model because decisions related to mental illness are often complex and involve a number of life domains. Issues related to social context and individual recovery point to the need for a preparation phase focused on establishing cooperation and mutual understanding as well as a clear follow-up phase that allows for feedback and adjustments to the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The current study contributes to a deeper understanding of decisional and information needs among users of community-based mental health services that may reduce barriers to participation in decision-making. The results also shed light on attitudinal, relationship-based, and cognitive factors that are important to consider in adapting SDM in the mental health system.

2007 application guidelines : Community Development Assistance Program : economic development.

The following activities are considered ineligible. 1. Construction of buildings, or portions thereof, used predominantly for general conduct of government (e.g. city halls, courthouses, jails, police stations, etc.) 2. General government expenses. 3. Costs of operating and maintaining public facilities and services (e.g. mowing parks and replacing street light bulbs). 4. Servicing or refinancing existing debt.

2008 application guidelines : Community Development Assistance Program : economic development.

The following activities are considered ineligible. 1. Construction of buildings, or portions thereof, used predominantly for general conduct of government (e.g. city halls, courthouses, jails, police stations, etc.) 2. General government expenses. 3. Costs of operating and maintaining public facilities and services (e.g. mowing parks and replacing street light bulbs). 4. Servicing or refinancing existing debt.

2008 application guidelines : Community Development Assistance Program : competitive housing rehabilitation.

The following activities are specifically identified as ineligible. 1. Construction of buildings, or portions thereof, used predominantly for the general conduct of government (e.g., city halls, courthouses, jails, police stations). 2. General government expenses. 3. Costs of operating and maintaining public facilities and services (e.g., mowing parks, replacing street light bulbs). 4. Servicing or refinancing of existing debt.

2009 application guidelines : Community Development Assistance Program : competitive design engineering.

The following activities are specifically identified as ineligible. 1. Design Engineering costs of water storage tanks/towers. 2. Construction of buildings, or portions thereof, used predominantly for the general conduct of government (e.g., city halls, courthouses, jails, police stations). 3. General government expenses. 4. Costs of operating and maintaining public facilities and services (e.g., mowing parks, replacing street light bulbs). 5. Servicing or refinancing of existing debt.

2009 application guidelines : Community Development Assistance Program : competitive housing rehabilitation.

The following activities are specifically identified as ineligible. 1. Construction of buildings, or portions thereof, used predominantly for the general conduct of government (e.g., city halls, courthouses, jails, police stations). 2. General government expenses. 3. Costs of operating and maintaining public facilities and services (e.g., mowing parks, replacing street light bulbs). 4. Servicing or refinancing of existing debt.

The template: A cooperative approach to evaluating community rehabilitation services

This article describes a workshop and consultation process utilized by four community rehabilitation services and other stakeholders. This process led to the development of an evaluation Template upon which to plan a service evaluation. The Template comprises a number of guiding questions within three broad domains. These are, the people domain (pertaining to the client, their disability, their family and service context), the program domain (pertaining to the service and its activities), and the perspective domain (pertaining to the broader social and community context). It is suggested that the Template, the process by which it was developed, and the guidelines for its use will have relevance to rehabilitation managers, administrators, and others involved in evaluation of community rehabilitation services.

Delivery of child development services by videoconferencing: a review of four years' experience in Queensland

In 2001 the Child Development Unit (CDU) in Brisbane piloted a series of monthly multidisciplinary case discussions via videoconference in the area of child development. During 2001 two sessions were provided; during 2004 there were 40. The substantial growth in 2004 was due to the expansion of child development services to include special interest group meetings and multipoint case conference meetings. In 2004, a total of 49 h of videoconferencing was conducted. The average session length was 75 min. Education and training sessions were delivered to 32 hospitals and health centres in Queensland and northern New South Wales. The maximum number of sites involved during a single videoconference was 25. The average number of attendees for each videoconference was five per site, including allied health staff, nurses and paediatricians. The delivery of child development services via videoconference has been shown to be useful in Queensland, especially for allied health staff working in regional and remote areas. The growth of the programme indicates its acceptance as a mainstream child development service in Queensland.