legend:julia = blackanu = bluejason = purplecathy = green

Headings/content/sub-content/ should be used as separate boxes or notes on the side exct. In publisher? anyway we can make a google doc with fancy formatting skills

Table of Contents:1. Introduction

● brief group bio ● summary of our RFP

2. Understanding the Problem (could we use a word other than problem)3. Our Approach 4. Workplan

● Summary of schedule and timeline

Appendices:● Bio’s with Pictures ● References used

1. INTRODUCTION

2. UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM:

Problem:Problem: Physical inactivity and obesity generate increased levels of disease, increasing healthcare cost and reduced quality of life in Toronto. These are symptoms of Toronto’s lag behind other leading North American cities with walking and cycling safety as well as other means of active transportation safety, infrastructure and mode share.

or

Toronto’s lag behind other leading North American cities with active transportation, safety, infrastructure reflect the increased rates of physical inactivity and obesity that have generated increased levels of disease, increasing healthcare cost and reduced quality of life for Torontonians.

How Toronto Public Health can make an Effective Impact: Chronic Diseases are diseases and illnesses of long duration and generally slow progression. They are now main cause of death and disability in Canada, therefore have a large impact on our national health care services. (Source: Active City Designing for Health, pg 3). Marginalized groups of people are most susceptible to chronic diseases (Source: ) . We define marginalized groups by: __________. We understand that vulnerable populations in Toronto are less engaged in active transportation and may be more at risk of injury, or negative health outcomes.Working with these priority populations may have a greater impact on reduced health care cost.

Exposing the direct relationship between active transportation and health outcomes is essential. An example of this relationship is Food Deserts(JARGEN) Expand on our understanding of this…

Existing projects and studies by City of Toronto ● provide a summary list of existing projects - ex. road to health ● demonstrate that we acknowledge their existing efforts and our commitment to build on

top of that ● details

Green, Active & Healthy Neighbourhoods Model: From Montreal Urban Ecology Center :Define and connect to our RFP GAHN goals are to transform already existing neighbourhoods into pedestrian-friendly places prioritizing solutions for public spaces. GAHN vision: Public spaces designed for all users and active and public transit enabled by adequate infrastructure.

Priorities to the project:SafteyEquity,more accessibleReadiness, easier to implement Potential for Innovation

Identified Stakeholders: Toronto Public HealthTransportation ServicesToronto Center for Active Transportation Community Members

Challenges for Active Transportation:

3. OUR APPROACH (theme)Cat note: I think our approach will separate us from the other groups. What we have right now are logical approaches for this project (participatory, collaborative etc.), but what can we say is our specialization? E.g. Will we be able to deliver the project with the lowest cost, or will we be able to deliver the project within the shortest amount of time? Or maybe we have the most understanding of this project because our past expertise?

How we understand community engagement: Successful community engagement is underpinned by inclusion and backed by strong communication. Developing relationships built on trust.

We understand that the two neighbourhood-level community engagement projects focused on an Active Transportation intervention are dependent on the built environment, health needs in the area, patterns of walking and cycling. Their is a need to increase participation in active transportation in Toronto to increase positive health impacts. Strategic community engagement focuses on the needs of the community. We understand that a tailored approach is required for each targeted community. Broadening the dialogue between the City of Toronto, TPH and local residents using shared knowledge is essential. These two community engagement projects will act as first step in developing active transportation demonstration projects in two geographic areas.

Access and equity approach, Bottom up,Seniors, children, persons with disabilities low-income, Grass rootsCommunication engagement strength and facilitation, Link, Translator, Need a Image or graphic : Bridge , network/net Broad approach, not only talk to usual suspects

Active Transportation = Active Communication We must make it clear that we are “suspending judgement, offering fresh insight and objectivity”[contrary to what we are hearing/learning in class, I don’t actually believe in objectivity and would find it difficult to say I am being objective] I agree. I think subjectivity is important for this project because we need to understand the needs of the community and the city to produce a solution. Of course we will be “objective” in the sense we will not favour a particular party.

Our approach is a collaborative and participatory one focused on relationship-building and engagement of each neighbourhood’s most vulnerable populations as defined by the project.Reframe walking, rolling, cycling Integration with public transportation facilitate coordination by helping them find a common ground for action

Public Health defines Community Engagement as the process of working with and through groups of people so that they become involved in decisions that affect them. Includes planning, development and management of services, as well as other activities (ex policy change) with the aim to improve health, well-being, or reduce health inequalities. (Source: Community engagement as a public health approach) Having a approach to help communities work as equal partners may lead to a more positive health outcomes and improve their sense of belonging.

the projects must be community oriented: a bottom-up approach Understanding our client:

-City of Toronto’s successes and failures in engaging communities.

Solution: Need new heading/merge with other heading. Identify informed, feasible options for improving their access to safe, active transportation. Defined recommendation to support increased and safer walking and cycling in the city.

There is a need to increase active transportation in Toronto for the following reasons:● prevent chronic health conditions ● prevent injuries

Enabling more community oriented knowledge and capacity to increase active transportation ● Not looking for an one-size fits all solution - specific to the project areas ● however, a general framework / structure should be developed for future modifications

4. THE WORK PLAN:Community Engagement Strategy: Phase 1:Phase 2:

Phase 3:Phase 4:Phase 5:

The workplan needs to complete the following tasks: ● build community knowledge and capacity ● identify barriers and opportunities for implementation ● improve communication and collaboration● identify potential intervention for improvement of existing projects

The Workplan should consider how to answer all the following questions: ● how to engage communities?

○ what are the tools available? ○ what are the tools applicable to the two identified geographic areas

● how to build knowledge and capacity? ○ what kind of education programs are available?○ what are applicable education programs? ○ what are effective avenues to outreach the education programs

● how to improve communications and collaborations? ○ what are possible communication tools?

■ public meeting, discussion groups, flyers, online forums, ■ how to communicate expertise knowledge (ex. theories) with

communities? ○ what consist of collaboration?

■ how much public engagement will the project include? ■ how much public engagement is feasible considering the available time

and budget ● what are potential barriers - political structure, communications with community ● what are potential opportunities - benefits for both city and community

○ city - better health targets; sustainable growth of city; more pedestrian friendly ○ community - engaging program to improve health; better amenity and

infrastructures for access; participatory power ● what are potential interventions?

○ policy recommendations■ land use planning■ design guidelines ■ community engagement and funding

○ projects to be developed with communities ■ community oriented - organic formation ■ community with city - collaboration ■ city expertise - knowledge and capacity building for the community

Collaborators/ Partners/ Stakeholders:

Government Organizations Public-Private Partnerships Local Community Groups

Toronto Public Health - staff advisory committee

LiveGreen Toronto Local Residents groups

City of Toronto -staff advisory committee

Toronto Center for Active Transportation (double check)

Local community based organizations (including local Community Health Centre)

Transportation Services- staff advisory committee

Clean Air Partnership Local schools including parent councils

Places of worship/faith groups

4. SCHEDULE AND TIMELINE ** Communicate with project manager every 2 weeks

Task in Sequence Details of Task Time Allocated for Each Task

Who is Responsible for Each Task/ Expectations

April 17th: Proposal Due

Meet with project manager

May 15: submit 2 draft community engagement strategies

May 31: Create 2 final community engagement strategies

Sept 30: Complete all community engagement activities

Nov 30: Submit 2 draft

community engagement reports

Dec 31:Submit 2 final community engagement reports

Evaluation of Deliverables

Deliverables: Develop and Implement two draft and Final Plans for Community Engagement.

Description of the type of community engagement strategies to be used in each community:

Phase 1. Understanding the Neighborhood and Limits to Active TransportationPhase 1: Orientation and Grounding Use participatory methods (community mapping, social media engagement, dotmocracy, design thinking, clickers) to facilitate dialogue and discussion

Phase 2. Exploring Urban Design Solutions for the Neighbourhood Develop Active Transportation Demonstration ProjectsPhase 2: Input (need to add)- key informant interviews- outreach materials drafted and reviewed - community events for info sharing, info gathering and potentially knowledge exchange- depending on the project site, online engagement (e.g. social media)- Hire: CE facilitators to share knowledge about health and safety benefits of AT. Timeline: In one years’ time communities will have identifies one or more preferred infrastructure interventions for AT areas.

- Research local knowledge, polices and patterns and needs by interviewing community leaders in AT, public health and Civic Engagement.- Conduct workshops and activities and interested Community stakeholders to refine this knowledge and neighborhood conditions and needs

Key Goals- Identify policy barriers- Best practices- New opportunities for improving built environment to support AT in the city.

- Build Stronger collaborations and increase community involvement in transportation decision making .

Phase 3. Building the Neighborhood’s Future TogetherCommunity Engagement: What is the expectation of TPH, City of Toronto divisions and community partners in terms of multilingual outreach and community engagement? - we will follow in accordance of TPH policy.

- Share knowledge and expertise about neighborhood condition and needs.- Share options with community members for improving build environment

Report back on one or more preferred infrastructure changes to AT in each area. And determine what barriers to implantation and ways to overcome barriers.

4. Partnership Building, Data Evaluation and Policy Evaluation:

Road to Health Report Recommendations:- Making AT safer; reduce vehicles speed limits, calming traffic, separate pedestrians and cyclists from traffic, increase safety at intersections. - Make more attractive- More accessible- Enable through land use planning. Potential Activities (might be too detailed?):- at community meeting/workshop: participatory mapping activities (asking people to map out where they do actively travel, where they don’t) - What are transportation planning tools used in Portland designed to access latent demand for AT and to evaluate the need for improvement to walking and cycling environments- anyone know, I just saw this referenced in Road to Health doc. ? - to engage people: if there are multi-unit buildings, hosting meetings) there, having surveys available in the building there- to engage people: online surveys, using hashtags to engage people (Twitter + Instagram), with consent of TPH etc, having a website to document the process and keep people in the loop - input from BIAs (if applicable) and businesses: survey methodology if time, and some interviews to determine method used by customers, space constraints and opportunities, thoughts about encouraging AT amongst their staff - knowledge exchange: potentially combine business development with AODA (e.g. stopthegap.ca ) - making sidewalks and roads easier to navigate and access for people in wheelchairs- participation in a festival or fair that encourages active transportation (e.g. if there is a festival that closes down the streets)

Phase 5: From Community Engagement, Highlight actions to increase walking and cycling safety and mode shares, in order to improve public health in Toronto. Identify strategies to facilitate implementation of these actions.

Things without a spot:- reference to Canada Post changes- plain language principles** see http://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tcdnstyl-chap?lang=eng&lettr=chapsect13&info0=13** see http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/stephens/intro.html** see http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/Resources/lutz.html- AODA compliance- driver awareness (though this may not be within the scope?)- integration with public transportation- social cohesion, sense of community, reducing social isolation-I think these can all be addressed in section one “Understanding of the problem” yeah I agree.