1. Branding Transportation as a
Public Health Service
PRESENTED BY:
CHPPD TRANSPORTATION WORK GROUP
1 3 9 th A n n u a l A P H A C o n f e r e n c e
Washington DC
November 1, 2011

2. The Transportation-Public Health Link
A Trans-disciplinary Approach
Karyn M. Warsow, MS, MPH
DrPH Candidate, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Department of Health Policy Management and Leadership
Stephen F. Mayer, PhD, PE
Parsons Corporation
Business Development Manager
Transportation Strategy Leader
No relationships to disclose

3. Transportation & Public Health
WHERE’S THE DISCONNECT?

4. APHA 10 Policy Statements
 Encouraging transportation and land-use planning policies, such as a complete
streets policy, that support healthy communities.
 Establishing performance measures to promote safe, affordable and equitable public
transit and alternative modes of transportation such as walking and cycling.
 Using health impact assessments to inform and guide transportation policy, projects
and planning.
 Fostering the participation of local communities and underserved populations in all
stages of the transportation planning and development process.
 Expanding the funding of community-based transportation programs and services
that promote health and provide access to healthy food and water, affordable
housing, employment, schools, health care and recreation.
 Funding programs that expand transportation options for disadvantaged or disabled
populations, and that promote safe, convenient transportation options for children
and seniors.
 Designing and constructing multi-modal transportation systems within each state
and metropolitan area to meet the needs of users of all ages and abilities, including
those in rural areas.
 Collecting data and funding research to evaluate how transportation and planning
policies affect public health and health equity.
 Supporting reductions in transportation-related emissions and greenhouse gases.
 Increasing vehicle, motorist, passenger, cyclist and pedestrian safety.

5. Transportation Overview
 Based on a military culture
 Security
 Mobility
 Economic sustainability
 Services viewed as a “utility”
 USDOT Mantra: Do MORE with less
 Adopting a business model
 Integrated Fiscal & Strategic Management Approach
 Performance metrics
 Financial accountability
 Public constituency now viewed as a customer/stakeholder
 Multi-modal integration (urban and rural)
 Sustainability of the Built Environment

6. Market Perspective of Transportation
 Total Market Revenue (top 25 companies) in support
of transportation infrastructure in the Top 10 States
decreased from $476B (2008) to $470B(2010)
representing a decrease of 1.16%
 State budgets are strained and priorities are largely
focused on maintenance activities as opposed to new
construction
 Transportation officials are actively exploring
alternative project delivery and financing approaches
to build new projects

7.  SAFETEA-LU (federal surface
Reauthorization transportation)
Chairman Mica
 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
8th extension of  Transportation Infrastructure Bank
SAFETEA-LU
 Public-Private Partnerships (P3)
6-year plan proposed
 Tolling as a financing source
$35 billion per year
(amount generated by
the 18.4 cents per
gallon federal gas tax)
Long-term planning
creates permanent jobs
Raises federal
capitation spending on
partnership projects

8. Sustainable Return on Investment (SROI)
Reduced
Stormwater
Reduced Transport Runoff Higher Density /
Air Emissions Higher Efficiency
Transportation
Time Savings /
Reliability Increased
Transportation
Transportation Safety
Cost Savings
Economic
Development
Reduced Benefits
O&M Costs
Public Transport
Expenditures Option Value
Courtesy of Eric Bill, MBA Senior Economist, HDR Decision Economics, eric.bill@hdrinc.com

9. Advantage of Non-Cash Benefits : The Public
Health Twist
Courtesy of Eric Bill, MBA Senior Economist, HDR Decision Economics, eric.bill@hdrinc.com

10. Defining the Link
Context Sensitive
Public Health
Solutions (DOT Project Basis)
“Context sensitive solutions (CSS) is a “Public Health
collaborative, interdisciplinary (multi/interdisciplinary) is the
approach that involves all stakeholders science of protecting and improving the
in providing a transportation facility that health of communities through
fits its setting. It is an approach that leads education, promotion of healthy lifestyles,
to preserving and enhancing scenic, and research on disease and injury
aesthetic, historic, community, and prevention.” By analyzing the effect of
environmental resources, while genetics, personal choice and the
improving or maintaining safety, environment on health, programs can
mobility, and infrastructure conditions.” be developed that prevent and/or halt the
re-occurrence of illness and injury. These
Results of Joint AASHTO/FHWA Context programs are based on the development
Sensitive Solutions Strategic Planning Process and implementation of educational
Summary Report, March 2007 initiative, policies, services, regulating
systems and the results of scientific
research (stakeholders).”
Source: www.whatispublichealth.org

11. Health Impact Assessment: Where does it fit?
 No such thing as “one size fits all”
 Transportation infrastructure projects are multilevel and multi-
dimensional just like human health
 Integrative approach using multiple measures and/or models
 Build on existing transportation network systems
 Increases buy-in by transportation professionals
 Decreases economic burden to the transportation system as compared to
a new public health initiative
 Encourages public health professionals as part of the team to educate
and guide the process
 SROI expansion
 Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) expansion
 Environmental Review (ER)/NEPA
 Define and identify applicable projects: bike/pedestrian (walkable
communities) vs. trade corridor

13. Community Health Planning and Policy
Development (CHPPD)
 CHPPD Transportation Work Group
 Indentified survey topic area of interest
 Identified a gap in APHA service reach: transportation
infrastructure professionals
 Trans-disciplinary approach: public health and transportation
 Non-APHA member partners
 Philosophy: Respect for individual perspective
 Experience
 Professional background
 Culture

14. Transportation Work Group: Core Team
 Karyn M. Warsow, MS, MPH
DrPH Candidate, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy
Management and Leadership
Previous Parsons Corporate Strategy Intern
APHA Section of CHPPD, TWG Chair
 Anthony Delucia, PhD
East Tennessee State University, Department of Surgery
APHA Section of Environment, TWG Vice Chair
 Ijeoma Nwachuku, PhD
APHA Section of CHPPD
 Stephen F. Mayer, PhD, PE
Parsons Corporation, Business Development Manager (Tolling /Innovation) & Transportation Strategy Leader
Assistant Professor of Strategic Management and Technology Transfer, Niagara University
 Robert O. Felt IV
Communications Specialist
Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT)
 Neil Gray
Director of Governmental Affairs
International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association (IBTTA)

15. Brief Overview
 The Transportation-Public Health Link (T-PH Link)
 Based on a conceptual process that considers the synergistic
association of factors affecting the health of communities:
 Sociopolitical
 Economic
 Environmental
 Analysis of performance metrics assigned to a particular facility
 Multi-dimensional integrative problem solving approach accounting
for the individual determinants acting at different levels of the
transportation system
 Evidence-based trans-disciplinary research approach
 Maintaining flexibility in perspective
 Information sharing based on lessons learned
 Linking of issues to improve best practices, policy and community

16. Objective and Expected Outcomes
 Objective
 Eliminate cross-discipline miscommunication between public
health and transportation professionals by using a practical
model to facilitate the exchange of information required to
improve community planning and policy development.
 Expected Outcomes
 Improve open mutual communication to facilitate the exchange
of information through active listening with understanding.
 Encourage partnerships between public health and
transportation professionals that result in the development of
innovative transportation strategies by merging ideas that
improve the health of communities.

17. Graphic Source: http://commons.lib.washington.edu/

18. Marketing & Social Networking
 Interpersonal Communications
 Transportation-related meetings (regional traffic safety, TRB, IBTTA
legislative conference, CHPPD…and anyone who will listen!)
 Conference presentations
 Michigan Public Health Association 2011
 APHA 2011
 Research Innovation Technology Administration (RITA): November
2012 abstract submission
 CHPPD Web-Paint
 Facebook
 Linkedin
 Proposed Website

19. Pilot Survey
 Sample population N=18
 Questions and top three responses
 What is public Health?
 Overall (good, wellbeing, broad health): 10
 Medical care: 2
 Collective/population health: 1
 What is the link between transportation and public health?
 Impact wellness: 6
 Access to medical care: 4
 Safety: 4
 What are issues that influence transportation decision and policy
making?
 Funding: 9
 Opinion/Advocacy: 5
 Demand/congestion: 5

20. Research Initiative
 Harris Interactive
 Qualitative Interviews
 200 Contacts: transportation infrastructure professionals
 50 completed surveys
 Quantitative Survey
 Based on qualitative survey results
 Nationally disseminated
 Seeking cause-effect marketing corporate partner
 Survey Results may lead to:
 Manuscript(s)
 Policy implications

21. What is Branding?
Source: http://marketingconversation.com/2011/06/02/branding-is-more-relevant-than-ever/

22. The Concept of Branding
 Branding transportation as a public health service will help to
eliminate the cross-discipline miscommunication between
public health and transportation professionals through the sharing of
information needed to improve community planning and policy
development.
 A partnership between transportation and public health has the
potential to facilitate innovative solutions to the challenges faced by
transportation with the merging of ideas based on lessons learned by
public health professionals in the field.
 Labeling of transportation as a public health service sends a
positive image to the public as opposed to transportation being viewed
as a utility. Who really wants to pay a utility bill?
 Transportation as a value added service to meet a demand in the
marketplace is more apt to receive public support and a willingness
to pay when the trade-off is improved quality of life.

23. Policy Implications
 Support a cultural shift in transportation infrastructure project
planning and development as reflective of a systematic
evidence-based research driven by an integrated fiscal and
strategic management business approach with health as an
integrated component of decision-making.
 Encourage the combined use and interpretation of qualitative
and quantitative data to make informed strategic decisions.
 Include trained public health professionals as part of the
transportation infrastructure planning and development team to
facilitate open mutual communication between the disciplines
and the public constituency.
 Brand transportation as a public health service to
facilitate an exchange of information and ideas and to facilitate
public buy-in.