Developing indicators for evaluation of age-friendly communities in Canada: process and results

Abstract

Introduction In 2006, the World Health Organization launched the Global Age-Friendly Cities Project to support active aging. Canada has a large number of age-friendly initiatives; however, little is known about the effectiveness and outcomes of age-friendly community (AFC) initiatives. In addition, stakeholders report that they lack the capacity and tools to develop and conduct evaluations of their AFC initiatives. In order to address these gaps, the Public Health Agency of Canada developed indicators to support the evaluation of AFC initiatives relevant to a wide range of Canadian communities. These indicators meet the varied needs of communities, but are not designed to evaluate collective impact or enable crosscommunity comparisons. Methods An evidence-based, iterative consultation approach was used to develop indicators for AFCs. This involved a literature review and an environmental scan. Two rounds of key expert and stakeholder consultations were conducted to rate potential indicators according to their importance, actionability and feasibility. A final list of indicators and potential measures were developed based on results from these consultations, as well as key policy considerations. Results Thirty-nine indicators emerged across eight AFC domains plus four indicators related to long-term health and social outcomes. All meet the intended purpose of evaluating AFC initiatives at the community level. A user-friendly guide is available to support and share this work. Conclusion The AFC indicators can help communities evaluate age-friendly initiatives, which is the final step in completing a cycle of the Pan-Canadian AFC milestones. Communities are encouraged to use the evaluation results to improve their AFC initiatives, thereby benefiting a broad range of Canadians.

A Global Pilot Study of Age-Friendly City Indicators

“…To this end, a number of tools have been developed in recent years for practitioners and researchers to assess such initiatives (e.g. Handler 2014;Neal and Wernher 2014;Orpana et al 2016;Public Health Agency of Canada 2015). The practical utility of these tools, however, is not yet well understood.…”

Korean translation and validation of the Community Commitment Scale for preventing social isolation in older adults

“…However, there are relatively few means of measuring actual use of these community‐level factors . At present, the Community Commitment Scale (CCS) can be used to measure the ability of a community to prevent older adults’ social isolation .…”

“…[13][14][15] However, there are relatively few means of measuring actual use of these community-level factors. 16,17 At present, the Community Commitment Scale (CCS) can be used to measure the ability of a community to prevent older adults' social isolation. 13 The CCS was found to have sufficient internal consistency and concurrent validity in Japanese local volunteer settings.…”

How Can the Lived Environment Support Healthy Ageing? A Spatial Indicators Framework for the Assessment of Age-Friendly Communities

“…In the same year, the Public Health Agency of Canada [ 16 ] released an evaluation guide comprising thirty-nine indicators directly relevant to the eight AFC domains. The indicators were selected to provide community-level measures for both quantitative and qualitative outcomes with four indicators to measure longer-term health and social outcomes [ 17 ].…”

“…In 2018, the WHO Regional Office for Europe synthesized the existing international approach into seven sets of tools to measure and communicate the assessment and monitoring of age-friendly initiatives in Europe [ 8 ]. However, there is concern that many of the suggested indicators and measures for the assessment and monitoring of AFC are subjective in nature [ 14 , 17 ] or survey based [ 12 ]. These existing approaches are expensive to administer at the community level and beyond the budgets of many local governments who ultimately have the responsibility for local area planning.…”