226770 Mining for gold: Analyzing local housing data to inform a smoke-free housing policy campaign

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Derek R. Smith, MPH/MSW , Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention, San Mateo County Health System, San Mateo, CA
Kimberly Puccetti , Public Health Nutrition, San Mateo County Health System, San Mateo, CA
Edith Cabuslay, MPH , Chronic Disease & Injury Prevention, Public Health, San Mateo County Health System, San Mateo, CA
Scott Morrow, MD, MPH, MBA , Health Officer, San Mateo County Health System, San Mateo, CA
The San Mateo County (California) Tobacco Prevention Program gathered data from the 3600+ local apartment housing complexes to conduct analysis of several factors to inform smoke-free housing campaign strategy. Analysis revealed useful data regarding residence of property owners, information about landlords who own multiple buildings in the County, and apartment building size trends in various cities.

Property owner residence analysis showed that 30% of landlords live in the same city as their property with another 45% of landlords living in another city than their property, but still in San Mateo County. A media campaign to engage landlords was conducted based on the knowledge that local media will reach the majority of targets.

Multiple property ownership analysis yielded a list of property owners to serve as campaign targets- a landlord who owns many hundreds of rental units could immediately impact overall local housing stock by implementing a smoke-free policy. Additionally, landlords who own property in a city where a smoke-free housing law already exists (such as Belmont) will be interviewed to determine whether the law impacted voluntary policies they enacted at their other properties in cities without mandatory smoke-free housing rules.

Building size data revealed that each city has a housing stock style- some cities have very few buildings, each with many units, and others have very many smaller buildings with only 4-10 units in each. These buildings warrant different approaches. Larger buildings that adopt smoke-free policies ultimately protect many residents, while smaller buildings require many individual advocacy meetings.

Learning Areas:
Chronic disease management and prevention
Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice
Implementation of health education strategies, interventions and programs
Planning of health education strategies, interventions, and programs
Program planning
Protection of the public in relation to communicable diseases including prevention or control

Learning Objectives:
1) Identify 3 factors that influence policy advocacy approaches for public health campaigns related to housing. 2) Discuss options for tailored approaches to public health campaigns in diverse communities.

Keywords: Housing, Tobacco Policy

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have Directed the Tobacco Prevention Program for over 4 years. During that period, I have had the opportunity to work with a variety of communities, including many community groups, on a wide range of chronic disease, community development, and tobacco issues.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.