This community planning project in West Carleton aimed to develop supports for healthy aging in place and enhance rural vitality. Key outcomes included: - Increased ability for seniors to age in place through new transportation supports, social groups, communication networks, and knowledge of existing services. - Increased volunteering, community leadership, and partnerships through engagement activities. - Creation of an action plan and ongoing task group to continue working on priorities like affordable transportation, caregiving supports, respite programs, and home care. Critical success factors included building on existing social networks and groups, the community developer's established relationships and trust, co-creating appropriate solutions, and focusing on an issue of broad importance like aging. The initiative

1. 1

2. 2
Engagement on Health Priorities for Seniors and Caregivers in West Carleton:
A Rural Community Development Initiative
Case Study and Evaluation Report November 2016
We offer sincere thanks to the participants in this community planning process, who gave so generously
of their time and insight.
Thanks to the Rural Ontario Institute for the resources for this evaluation.
Special thanks to United Way Ottawa for the resources for the rural community development initiative,
including this community planning process, as part of the Ottawa Neighbourhoods Social Capital Forum.
The evaluation was conducted by “Effective Measures”, a project of the Social Planning Council of
Ottawa
For More Information
Project Contact
Julie McKercher,
Rural Community Developer, Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre
613-591-3686 ext. 498
mckercher@wocrc.ca
Evaluation Contact
Dianne Urquhart
Effective Measures (a project of the Social Planning Council of Ottawa
613-236-9300 ext. 303
dianneu@spcottawa.on.ca
GIS Mapping Contact
Stefka Patchova
Effective Measures
stefkap@spcottawa.on.ca

3. 3
Engagement on Health Priorities for Seniors and Caregivers in West Carleton:
A Rural Community Development Initiative
Case Study and Evaluation Report November 2016
Contents
Summary..................................................................................................................................................4
Overview of the Project ..........................................................................................................................6
Summary of the Change Strategy Re Healthy Aging In Place...............................................................7
Exploring Rural Community Vitality......................................................................................................8
The Evaluation Approach .....................................................................................................................10
Evaluation Findings: How Much Did We Do?.....................................................................................11
Did the process have good participation from community residents, particularly seniors?..............11
Did the engagement strategy reach across the whole of West Carleton?.........................................11
Evaluation Findings: How Well Did We Do It?...................................................................................12
How satisfied were participants?........................................................................................................12
How did the activities compare to best practices in community engagement? ................................12
Evaluation Findings: Is Anybody Better Off?......................................................................................15
What were the main outcomes of the community planning project according to participants?......15
Why do these outcomes matter? .......................................................................................................16
What do participants identify as the most significant change from the initiative? ...........................20
How do the identified outcomes relate to the Rural Community Vitality Framework?.....................20
Did the initiative meet the outcomes set out in the proposal to the Rural Ontario Institute?..........22
What was the specific contribution of WOCRC in achieving the outcomes? .....................................22
Evaluation Findings: What Did We Learn?.........................................................................................23
Critical Success Factors In Supporting Healthy Aging In Rural Places.................................................23
Critical Success Factors In Supporting Rural Community Vitality .......................................................23
A Distinct Model for Rural Community Development........................................................................24
Next Steps ..............................................................................................................................................25
Appendix 1: Snapshot of New and Strengthened Partnerships........................................................26
Appendix 2: Rural Vitality Framework and Baseline Data................................................................27
Appendix 3: Applying a Seniors Lens to Rural Community Vitality.................................................34
Appendix 4: Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps: Healthy Aging in Place........................37
Appendix 4 Cont’d: Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps: Rural Vitality ...........................48

4. 4
Summary
“Engagement on Health Priorities for Seniors and Caregivers in West Carleton” was a community
planning project in 2016 led by Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre (WOCRC) in collaboration
with the West Carleton Family Health Team (WCFHT), the Reverend Monique Stone of the Anglican Parish
of Huntley and the City of Ottawa Rural Affairs office. The goals were:
 To develop and implement an integrated approach to improving health wellness and resilience at the
community level for older adults, caregivers and adults with disabilities.i
in West Carleton;
 To enhance rural vitality in West Carleton.
The initiative has been overwhelmingly successful, resulting in better supports for healthy aging in the
rural communities of West Carleton, an action plan based on strong local connections and existing support
services, an increase in volunteering and community leadership, as well as high energy and optimism
about the ability of rural residents to lead meaningful improvements in their communities. A multi-
stakeholder Task Group has been created to continue the leadership on the initiative.
Objectives Achieved
 To develop and implement an integrated approach to improving health wellness and
resilience at the community level for older adults and caregivers and adults with
disabilities in West Carleton
 To enhance rural vitality in West Carleton


Key Successes
Outputs
 Community
engagement and
consultation process
 Action planning process
(co-creation of
solutions)
 Action plan in support
of healthy aging in West
Carleton
 On-going leadership
local group
 Case study and
evaluation
Outcomes
 Increased ability for healthy aging in place in West Carleton
 Increased volunteering, community leadership and partnerships
 Two service hubs for seniors
 New transportation supports
 New social groups
 Improved communication networks for seniors
 Increased knowledge of services that exist
 New volunteer handyman service
 Local volunteers helping seniors’ to use computers more effectively
 Less cynicism from residents re their ability to effect change locally
 $183,000 investment to reduce seniors’ isolation
 Increased awareness of and interest in rural aging issues
 Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre better used by seniors
Critical Success Factors
• Building on and enhancing the existing social networks, particularly connecting “webs” of people who know
people in the community.
• Existing community groups worked well together.
• The on-going United Way investment in the community developer (beginning in 2011). This had resulted in
key partnerships, a network of relationships in the community and knowledge of the issues and a
foundation of trust between WOCRC and the residents.
• Lots of face-to-face time.
• The right leadership – trusted local leaders, local groups with effective and collaborative leadership, well
established community development support.

5. 5
• Co-creation of the service delivery model, which resulted in a model appropriate to the rural areas and more
sustainable.
• Recognition that “seniors” are a diverse population.
• Community development support to help rural residents navigate and influence bureaucracies (including
policies of service agencies which may not work well for rural communities).
• Focusing on one issue that has broad resonance.
• Leveraging resources, partnerships, agency policy changes.
Challenges
Significant distances between population centres in West Carleton make it difficult to ensure full participation in
the planning activities, by seniors and by other agencies (with respect to their on-going capacity to provide
services).
Roles and Responsibilities for the Lead Agency
Responsibilities
 Soliciting and managing the resources for the
planning process and some on-going activities
 Helping to identify services and agencies that
could be part of the aging-in-place plan
 Connecting stakeholders (in collaboration with
others)
 Serving as the secretariat (organizing meetings,
managing communications, etc.)
 Providing organizational and programmatic
resources for some of the initiatives, such as
insurance for the Volunteer Home Maintenance
initiative
Achievements
 Designing the community consultation process in
a manner consistent with good community
engagement and asset-based community
development approaches
 Introducing and leading the concept of co-
production of services
 Undertaking many of the negotiations with
partners to define contributions
 Undertaking an internal process to re-organize
their own seniors’ services
 Supporting capacity of local initiatives including
leveraging resources
Primary Areas for Improvement
 Using a broader range of supports to participation.
 Increased participation by other service agencies in the process and the resulting action plan.
 Clearer information on the link between the needs assessment and proposed solutions and the priorities
identified for action planning.
 More diverse methods for defining solutions and clarity with respect to decision making processes.
Lessons Learned
 Lessons learned about the strategies have considerable transferability for other rural communities.
 Social capital (the groups and networks in the community and who the individual knows) is a critical
component of rural community vitality and healthy aging in place.
 Build on existing organizations and local leadership.
 The process was consistent with best practices for rural community development.
 A co-creation design strategy is essential to successful, appropriate and sustainable rural service delivery.
 “Seniors” have many cohorts, e.g. those who use the internet and those who will not use the internet.
 If you have the right leadership, people will follow (trusted local leaders and community developer).
 The seniors’ population has a unique and critical role in terms of rural community vitality.
 A critical role is partnerships development and linking services to groups of local residents. Rural
communities may need community development support to help them navigate and influence
bureaucracies (including policies of service agencies which may not work well for rural communities).
 Face-to-face, following up and showing up are important.
 Build capacity of existing stakeholders for sustainability (e.g. leveraging funds / insurance coverage / space
to support implementation by local residents).
 Celebrate small wins.

6. 6
Overview of the Project
“Engagement on Health Priorities for Seniors and Caregivers in West Carleton” was a community
planning project in 2016 led by Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre (WOCRC) in collaboration
with the West Carleton Family Health Team (WCFHT), the Reverend Monique Stone of the Anglican Parish
of Huntley and the City of Ottawa Rural Affairs office. The goals were:
 To develop and implement an integrated approach to improving health wellness and resilience at the
community level for older adults, caregivers and adults with disabilities.ii
in West Carleton;
 To enhance rural vitality in West Carleton.
The project emerged from and built upon five years of rural community development by WOCRC, funded
by United Way Ottawa (see Case Studies). The unique and considerable challenges facing rural seniors
had been identified from the very start of the project in 2011. Through five years of community
development, the key partnerships had been established that were the foundation of the aging-in-place
planning process.
In 2015, stakeholders began a significant community engagement initiative to support healthy aging in
place in West Carleton, ideally in seniors’ own homes. In early 2016, WOCRC was excited to receive
resources to support a robust consultation and resident-engaged planning process from the Rural Ontario
Institute. UpIn June 2016, they received three years of additional funding from New Horizons for Seniors
(Employment and Social Development Canada), for some essential programming to reduce seniors’
isolation and engage the broader local community to connect more effectively with seniors.
The partners led an extensive community engagement and consultation process from February to May
2016, including four formal consultations across West Carleton, several smaller meetings, interviews and
email feedback. The consultation design was strongly influenced by the methods of Asset Based
Community Developmentiii
. Over 400 stakeholders participated, most notably a broad cross-section of
seniors, caregivers and community organizations. The participants identified issues, assets to build on
and recommendations.iv
It resulted in a shared understanding of the supporting factors and barriers, key
community assets, and the following five priorities for service:
 Affordable and accessible transportation
 Caregiving: care unit and support
 Respite and adult day programs (ADP)
 Housing and household services
 Home care (Community Care Access Centre).
The consultation feedback was transformed into a sustainable community action plan. The partners used
an approach called co-productionv
, in which those most affected are key decision-makers in designing
solutions. The action planning included extensive negotiations with potential partners. It culminated in
October 2016, with agreement on a multi-faceted approach with supports provided by community
associations and funded services. Many new initiatives began even during the planning.
The initiative has been overwhelmingly successful, resulting in better supports for healthy aging in the
rural communities of West Carleton, an action plan based on strong local connections and existing support
services, an increase in volunteering and community leadership, as well as high energy and optimism
about the ability of rural residents to lead meaningful improvements in their communities. A multi-
stakeholder Task Group has been created to continue the leadership on the initiative.

7. 7
Summary of the Change Strategy Re Healthy Aging In Place
What is the problem we are trying to solve? Assumptions
 Rural West Carleton older adults are able to stay
in their homes and communities for longer.
 Rural West Carleton caregivers are supported in
the community.
 Access to services is challenging.
 Data is “on point”.
 Engagement is possible.
 The “right” people will participate in the process.
What is the entry point to the audience? Key steps needed for measurable change
 Community engagement plan that targets groups
below, for surveys, forums and interviews:
o West Carleton seniors
o West Carleton seniors’ council
o PCO
o West Carleton Family Health Team
including the community paramedic
o West Carleton Family Health Team
waiting room / clients
o Faith communities
o Community associations
o Arnprior family visiting volunteers
 A shared understanding of strengths and barriers
in the community re. aging in place
 Priority issues identified in the context / culture of
West Carleton
 Shared goals that leverage capacity to remove
barriers
 Cross-sectoral partnerships and explicit
relationships with local stakeholders
 Community readiness for a phased-in approach to
develop / deliver services
 Priority projects identified that will achieve the
objectives
 Evaluation and knowledge exchange
What are the wider benefits of the project?
 Explicit partnership with the West Carleton Family Health Team
 Supporting AROW priorities
 Increased cross-sectoral partnerships
 Increased resources for priority issues via interest and support from funders
 Community vitality and capacity increased
 Greater awareness of seniors and rural issues and opportunities
What will be the long term change?
 Shared goals / objectives that leverage strengths to remove barriers to healthy aging in place
 Decreased isolation of seniors and caregivers
 Embedded cross-sectoral partnerships
 Community board developed
 Priority projects implemented
 Process developed for engagement, community development and sharing with other rural communities

8. 8
Exploring Rural Community Vitality
The rural community development project, which formed the foundation of the aging-in-place planning
process, was part of a broader place-based community development initiative funded by United Way
Ottawa since 2011 called, the Ottawa Neighbourhood Social Capital Forum (ONSCF). The initiative was
based on an understanding of the critical importance of social capital (relationships, networks and groups)
for vibrant communities and neighbourhoods. The ONSCF Theory of Change (below) set out the building
blocks for strengthening communities and neighbourhoods.
The ONSCF provided measurement tools through a customizable on-line data gathering portalvi
to track
key indicators of improvement, particularly:
 indicators related to social capital (participation, volunteering and leadership);
 indicators of increased resources for priority issues (in-kind and cash contributions), and
 outcomes.
WOCRC’s “Rural Community Development” project (from 2011 onward) was one of four projects within
the ONSCF, and the only project operating in Ottawa’s rural areas. Aging in place had been identified as
a priority issue in the first year of the rural CD ONSCF work and evolved into the current project in 2015.
The Rural Ontario Institute’s project “Measuring Rural Community Vitality”vii
provided an opportunity to
better understand how the ONSCF theory of change applied to a rural community, distinct from an urban
community. Of all Canadian cities, Ottawa has the largest rural area; 80 percent of the city’s territory is
comprised of rural areas. Approximately 10 percent of the city’s population lives in rural communities,
and that population is rapidly changing and growing at a faster rate than the urban areas of Ottawa.viii
These changes bring both opportunities and challenges in terms of rural community vitality.
While the focus of the project and the evaluation was squarely on improving the aging in place
environment in West Carleton, the initiative provided a rich case study with lessons learned about rural
community vitality including civic engagement, social capital and community well-being.
Despite the growing interest in community vitality and rural vitality, there is no agreed upon definition of
what community and rural vitality are, and very little research on what nourishes community vitality. For
example, the definition of community vitality used by the Canadian Index of Wellbeing is particularly
focused on factors usually associated with social capital: relationships among people, public, non-
governmental, and private organizations, level of participation in groups and activities, level of trust, sense
of belonging, etc. In contrast, much of the research emerging from the United States focuses on socio-
Diverse sectors
involved and
making better
use of existing
resources for
priority issues
Residents
involved in
different ways
More resources
around priority
issues
Concrete
improvement
on priority
issues (in assets,
programs,
policies or
conditions)
Stronger and
more vibrant
communities

9. 9
economic factors, such as employment, poverty, inequality, education, population change, etc. In addition
to these socio-economic factors, this research also sometimes focuses on the availability of services and
amenities, such as transportation, housing, recreation facilities and programs, telecommunication
infrastructure, etc., on social capital indicators, such as level of volunteerism and trusts, and on the health
of the population.ix
As the foundation of the project evaluationx
, the Social Planning Council of Ottawa developed a framework
for rural community vitality. The framework, summarized below and elaborated in Appendix 2, reflects
both the socio-economic and social capital components in the collective capacity of communities to
respond to change and to sustain communities, to their resilience, sustainability, and adaptability.xi
RURAL VITALITY INDICATORS FRAMEWORK
Key information (context and data) was gathered related to the six domains, using data from the
Community Data Program and the Ottawa Police Services.xii
The Framework, rationale, indicators and
related data are found in Appendix 2 Rural Vitality Framework and Baseline Data and Appendix 3
Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps. This information serves as the baseline for evaluating rural
community vitality in West Carleton. Interactive on-line maps with in/out zoom capability were also
prepared. They can be easily updated over time with additional relevant information (e.g. volunteer
patterns, location of supports, etc.), and are intended to serve as a visual aid to track changes over time
related to the core themes of rural community vitality and healthy aging. (Explore the maps at this link.)
With the focus of the project on aging-in-place, it was beyond the scope of this project to robustly measure
changes in these indicators as a result of the project. Nonetheless, the qualitative data gathering surfaced
important outcomes related to these domains (see “Evaluation Findings” below) which provide important
learning about rural community vitality, civic engagement and social capital.

10. 10
The Evaluation Approach
The Social Planning Council of Ottawa’s “Effective Measures” team conducted the evaluation.
The evaluation was designed in line with a “Results Based Accountability”TM
(RBA) framework. To the
extent possible, baseline information (context and some data) was gathered and prepared for future
monitoring (see Appendices 2 and 3).xiii
In particular, Appendix 3, “Applying A Seniors Lens” sets out some
of the key Population Level Data with respect to seniors in West Carleton which form the baseline of the
initiative.
The evaluation explored three primary RBA questions:
 How much did we do?
 How well did we do it?
 Is anybody better off?
Data gathering for the evaluation of the project occurred throughout the process and included:
 Assessment of project records including the standardized project records used within the United
Way’s neighbourhood community development initiative to monitor changes in social capital (i.e.
connections between residents and networks) and partnership engagement
 Assessments of satisfaction at the end of each consultation session
 A participatory evaluation meeting with over 20 stakeholders in October 2016.
“Results Based Accountability” has gained popularity due in part to the clarity of the questions it poses.
However, classic RBA presents findings as service numbers and percentages, which does not adequately
capture the outcomes of a community engagement and planning process such as this project. Therefore,
the RBA approach was modified to provide more robust information with respect to the question, “Is
Anyone Better Off” by using validated methodologies designed to capture and understand outcomes,
specifically:
 Outcome Mappingxiv
 Ripple Mappingxv
and
 The Most Significant Change Techniquexvi
.
These methodologies place particular value on the perspective of the participants – i.e. those most
affected – to identify and rank the outcomes.
Participants in the group evaluation meeting identified a wide range of outcomes which have been
summarized into 20 primary outcomes from the project. The Effective Measures team grouped these
outcomes under the two Outcome Areas for the project (Healthy aging in place and Rural vitality). The
Effective Measures team also linked the outcomes to the domains in the Rural Vitality Index and related
Seniors Lens.
In the group evaluation meeting, project participants identified the three most significant changes which
had resulted from the project. The Effective Measures team has validated the outcomes with additional
community stakeholders.

11. 11
Evaluation Findings: How Much Did We Do?
Did the process have good participation from community residents, particularly seniors?
The community planning process had excellent participation from seniors and others affected by the
issues, both in terms of numbers and roles.
The project captured feedback from more than 400 residents. This is equivalent to 16% of the total seniors
population (although not all participants were seniors). Participants included younger and older seniors,
caregivers, representatives of community organizations involved with seniors (such as seniors social
groups and veterans groups). Interviews were conducted with individuals supporting seniors with
dementia, in order to include information with respect to their distinct circumstances.
Residents fulfilled a variety of roles in the process, including participants, volunteers and leaders. Many
residents launched new initiatives in support of aging in place, as a result of the project’s catalytic effect.
Did the engagement strategy reach across the whole of West Carleton?
The community planning process was designed to gather input and respond to diverse needs across the
vast geography of West Carleton, and to recognize that different communities had different needs and
assets. From the outset the priority was to target Fitzroy Harbour, Constance Bay and Carp, the main
population centres in West Carleton. A public consultation was held in each of these three communities.
In addition, a discussion and survey exercise was held at an event in Kinburn. The public launch, two
consultations and the group evaluation event were held at the West Carleton Complex outside of Carp.
These public events were supplemented by in-person interviews, phone interviews and an open
solicitation of email feedback.
400
residents participated
equivalent to
16% of the seniors population
8
community meetings
plus interviews
and electronic feedback
122
people volunteered in the
process
contributing 253 hours of time
25
residents served a
leadership role

12. 12
Evaluation Findings: How Well Did We Do It?
“Moving from consultation and needs to planning and implementation was done properly and
succeeded. We are putting the plan into concrete action.”
Resident at the October 2016 group evaluation discussion.
How satisfied were participants?
The best assessment of how well the community planning process was done, is the satisfaction of the
participants. Feedback was gathered at the end of each consultation event and in a whole group
evaluation discussion in October 2016. Overall feedback was very positive. Participants appreciated that
they had a chance to share a wide range of challenges and to participate in the design of solutions. They
were appreciative of the openness to different strategies and to collaboration and synergy between
community initiatives and agency service strategies. The planning process was an enabling platform which
facilitated needs to be clarified, creative solutions to be developed and a broad cross section of
stakeholders (most importantly rural seniors) to participate in different ways including in leadership roles.
Most significantly participants were satisfied that the planning process:
 enhanced social connections and volunteering in the community and
 resulted in concrete action which is improving supports for aging in place in West Carleton.
How did the activities compare to best practices in community engagement?
A secondary way to assess the quality of the community planning process is to compare the activities to
best practices. There are no standardized measures for quality of community engagement processes.
However, the Scottish Government has established an excellent framework of standards which includes
assessment criteria which are very useful for evaluating community engagement processes.xvii
Although
WOCRC was not aware of these standards while they were doing the community planning process, and
did not gather data specifically related to these standards, they agreed to their use as a helpful evaluation
tool at the end of the process.
The framework includes seven community engagement standards, each with several indicators of quality.
Using information from the project records, we have assigned a value from 0 to 2 for each indicator:
0 = no information this criteria was met;
1 = some information this criteria was met;
2 = information indicates this criteria was met.
The total score for each indicator is then presented as a percentage, along with a total score for all
indicators, presented as a percentage.
It is important to understand that this assessment is not comprehensive, as the data gathering to assign
the value is based only on the project records, which did not require these standards and criteria to be
documented. The results, presented in the table below, should be seen as a snapshot of characteristics
of quality.

13. 13
Inclusion Standard
We will identify and involve the people and organisations that are affected by the focus of the
engagement
100%
The people and groups who are affected by the focus of the engagement are involved at the
earliest opportunity.
2
Measures are taken to involve groups with protected characteristics (e.g. equity seeking groups)
and people who are excluded from participating due to disadvantage relating to social or
economic factors.
2
Participants in the community engagement process commit to continued two-way communication
with the people they work with or represent.
2
A wide range of opinions, including minority and opposing views, are valued in the engagement
process.
2
Support Standard
We will identify and overcome any barriers to participation.
50%
An assessment of support needs is carried out, involving all participants. 1
Action is taken to remove or reduce any practical barriers which make it difficult for people to
take part in engagement activities.
1
Access to impartial and independent development support is provided for groups involved in the
community engagement process.
1
Planning Standard
There is a clear purpose for the engagement, which is based on a shared understanding of community
needs and ambitions.
83%
Partners are involved at the start of the process in identifying and defining the focus that the
engagement will explore.
2
A clear and agreed engagement plan is in place. 2
All available information which can affect the engagement process has been shared and used to
develop the community engagement plan.
1
Partners agree what the outcomes of the engagement process should be, what indicators will be
used to measure success, and what evidence will be gathered.
1
The timescales for the engagement process are realistic. 2
There are sufficient resources to support an effective engagement process. 2
Working Together Standard
We will work effectively together to achieve the aims of the engagement.
86%
The roles and responsibilities of everyone involved are clear and understood. 2
Decision-making processes and procedures are agreed and followed. 1
The methods of communication used during the engagement process meet the needs of all
participants.
2
Information that is important to the engagement process is accessible and shared in time for all
participants to properly read and understand it.
2
Communication between all participants is open, honest and clear. 2
The community engagement process is based on trust and mutual respect. 2
Participants are supported to develop their skills and confidence during the engagement. 1
Methods Standard
We will use methods of engagement that are fit for purpose.
60%
The methods used are appropriate for the purpose of the engagement. 2
The methods used are acceptable and accessible to participants. 2
A variety of methods are used throughout the engagement to make sure that a wide range of
voices is heard.
1

14. 14
Full use is made of creative methods which encourage maximum participation and effective
dialogue.
1
The methods used are evaluated and adapted, if necessary, in response to feedback from
participants and partners.
0
Communication Standard
We will communicate clearly and regularly with the people, organisations and communities affected by
the engagement.
67%
Information on the community engagement process, and what has happened as a result, is clear
and easy to access and understand.
2
Information is made available in appropriate formats. 1
Without breaking confidentiality, participants have access to all information that is relevant to the
engagement.
1
Systems are in place to make sure the views of the wider community continuously help to shape
the engagement process.
1
Feedback is a true representation of the range of views expressed during the engagement
process.
1
Feedback includes information on: the engagement process; the options which have been
considered; and the decisions and actions that have been agreed, and the reasons why.
2
Impact Standard
We will assess the impact of the engagement and use what we have learned to improve our future
community engagement.
100%
The outcomes the engagement process intended to achieve are met. 2
Decisions which are taken reflect the views of participants in the community engagement process. 2
Local outcomes, or services, are improved as result of the engagement process. 2
Participants have improved skills, confidence and ability to take part in community engagement in
the future.
2
Partners are involved in monitoring and reviewing the quality of the engagement process and
what has happened as a result.
2
Feedback is provided to the wider community on how the engagement process has influenced
decisions and what has changed as a result.
2
Learning and evaluation helps to shape future community engagement processes. 2
Overall Score (61/76) 80%
This snapshot, showing an overall score of 80%, suggests that the community engagement process was
done in a way that was strongly consistent with best practices in community engagement as defined by
this framework.
Areas for improvement include using a broader range of supports to participation, clearer information on
the link between the needs assessment and proposed solutions and the priorities identified for action
planning, more engagement by other agencies serving seniors, more diverse methods for defining
solutions and clarity with respect to decision making processes.

15. 15
Evaluation Findings: Is Anybody Better Off?
What were the main outcomes of the community planning project according to participants?
Outcome Area 1:
Improved supports for
healthy aging in place in West Carleton
Outcome Area 2:
Increased rural vitality
Outcome
Two service hubs for seniors are being
established in West Carleton as a “one stop
point of access”, to be opened by end of 2016,
with WOCRC serving as the anchor agency. (4)
The project increased partnerships between existing agencies, institutions and
for-profit services, which will result in increased access to services. (2)
Transportation supports have been improved
as a result of WOCRC changing the policies and
fees for its seniors transportation, to make this
service more affordable and accessible to
seniors in West Carleton. (5)
The project increased community leadership
by focusing on one target population, and by
creating mechanisms (such as the Task Force)
for key people to commit their time and
energy to concrete projects. (10)
Transportation supports have been improved
as a result of additional volunteer drivers
coming forward through the planning process.
(6)
Communications networks for seniors have
been improved through the new West
Carleton Facebook group, better information
at the libraries / community associations /
groups, a new directory of services and more
effective use of word of mouth. (7)
The project reduced cynicism and increased
confidence with respect to the possibilities for
residents to effect positive changes in their
rural communities. (9)
The project increased volunteering and community relationships in the
communities by focusing on healthy aging in place. (1)
Residents are working to improve access to
high speed internet as a result of recognizing
the importance of electronic communications
for connecting seniors and services. (11)
Seniors in Constance Bay have increased
opportunities for regular social activities as a
result of a new seniors social group. (8)
The project has increased hope, knowledge and supports (formal and informal)
so that residents in West Carleton are more able to manage their health and
living situation and stay longer in their community as they age. (3)
The planning process improved connections
between community groups to share
information and resources, particularly across
villages and across sectors (e.g. community
associations and faith based groups, etc.). (12)
As a result of the project, some community
stakeholders are planning exploratory
conversations beginning late 2016 about
creating more affordable housing. (13)

16. 16
Outcome Area #1 Continued:
Improved supports for healthy aging in place in West Carleton
Why do these outcomes matter?
The summary above highlights that community planning process achieved a broad range of important
outcomes. The outcomes have been grouped into three categories related to the Theory of Changexviii
:
(1) Outcomes primarily related to improved supports for seniors to age in place in West Carleton;
(2) Outcomes primarily related to increased rural vitality;
(3) Outcomes which significant impact both.
Participants in the planning process provided additional information about these outcomes. The numbers
in brackets link the comments to the outcomes in the summary. The quotes are from participants in the
process, particularly from an evaluation meeting in October 2016.
Increased volunteering and community relationships (1)
Stronger community networks
“There was a huge increase in energy.”
“There are lots of little communities out here, and it’s brought everyone together around a
common purpose. There’s lots more cross-communication between the communities and that’s
really valuable.”
Participants identified that the community
planning initiative created stronger community
relationships. Seniors councils, community
associations, women’s institutes and many
other community organizations that were doing
their own important work, began working
together in new ways. The initiative provided a
focus that energized existing volunteer
initiatives and social networks to connect across
interest areas (e.g. veterans, faith communities,
etc.) and across communities (e.g. different
Seniors have increased knowledge of what
services are available. (14)
WOCRC is being better used by seniors in
West Carleton, demonstrated by increased
client contacts. (17)
Seniors have increased capacity to remain in
their homes as a result of the creation of a
new volunteer handyman service. (15)
Local volunteers are helping seniors’ to use
computers to improve quality of life. (20)
There is increased investment to support
rural aging in place, with WOCRC receiving
$183,000 for a capacity building project
through New Horizons for Seniors (ESDC). (19)
The two service hubs which will be opened
before the end of 2016 will increase caregiver
support programming in West Carleton. (16)
There is increased awareness of and interest
in aging issues, including increased interest by
local residents, increased awareness by
broader stakeholders of the impact of rurality,
and increased understanding of the unique
challenges / assets of each community. (18)
“The degree to which people, organizations
and businesses are connected to each other,
and are willing to cooperate and innovate
together is recognized as an important
factor in the human and economic well-
being of a community as well as its capacity
to grow and improve.”
Rural Ontario Institute communication to
WOCRC, November 2015

17. 17
villages). This actually increased energy within existing networks and resulted in new social
networks (on the ground and virtual) because of this focus on a specific clientele (e.g. the
Facebook group in Constance Bay and the Men’s Ministry developing the handyman service).
Community relationships (also called social capital) are a key asset of any community, particularly
rural communities. Strong community networks are a key component of vibrant rural
communities and are essential to effectively and sustainably supporting aging in place.
A way to give back to the community
“There’s an increase in connectedness to others in the community to share skills and gifts.”
It added energy toward helping others as concrete volunteer opportunities presented themselves
for those with specific interest in helping seniors remain in their home/community longer and
safer. New volunteers have come forward, as residents were able to see how they could
contribute concretely (for example new volunteer drivers, residents helping seniors to use
computers, new social activities and the new volunteer handyman service). “Volunteers are
coming forward through community and personal contacts rather than through organizations
such as WOCRC.” Participants identified a renewed sense that everyone had something to
contribute. Research has indicated that connectedness and belonging are essential attributes of
strong communities, and important social determinants of health. Volunteering provides
important resources to address issues, contributes to feelings of well-being as individuals feel
useful and valued, and is an important indicator of strong communities.
Increased partnerships (2)
“Access to services will be more equitable between the rural, suburban, urban parts of Ottawa and
tailored to the unique needs of our communities.”
The consultation process clarified the primary areas for improvement and used asset mapping to
identify potential assets that could contribute to concrete solutions. Through the initiative,
connections were formed between community resources that would not otherwise be known to
each other. The task group followed up on opportunities for partnership and successfully
negotiated new services for the area (e.g. the new service hubs, with different stakeholders
providing the space and services). The co-production process identified opportunities for
partnership and enabled formal and informal stakeholders to identify how they could contribute
to solutions (e.g. the volunteer handyman service for which WOCRC will ensure insurance
coverage). Participants felt the process had resulted in better relationships with existing
organizations that had previous operated in isolation (silos). The project increased interest in
rural issues and approaches, and has a potential multiplier effect, as other agencies in Ottawa
become interested in doing similar work in their rural areas. Most importantly, the increase in
partnerships has resulted in increased services for the area and a greater likelihood of
sustainability of those services, as they are founded on what already exists. See Appendix 1 for a
summary of the new and enhanced partnerships resulting from the project.
Seniors more able to manage their health and living situation and stay longer in their community (3)
“We have been heard with respect to the systemic challenges for seniors and are coming up with
creative solutions. Even frail seniors are being heard.”
“Older adults are wanting more information sooner than later about the new services to be
provided. It’s giving hope that the services are now here to stay. Seniors who thought they would
have to move away have some hope they will be able to stay in their community longer.”
The project will enable seniors to stay in their home and community longer, through better flow
of information about existing services, as well as the provision of new services and supports right

18. 18
in the villages. It has made older adults think more about their present status and what will be in
the future for them, including what supports are needed in the community. As well, it has sparked
energy around older adults informing themselves about better ways to take care of themselves.
For example, some individuals took training to become facilitators for “take charge of your health”
workshops, as a direct result of participating in the consultations and the new social group in
Constance Bay is organizing workshops to enable seniors to take better charge of their health and
well-being. Most significantly participants highlighted that the initiated had provided hope to
older adults that they would be able to age in a healthy manner in their own rural communities.
These changes have strengthened the community at the individual and collective level. The
changes in concrete supports and in sentiment are very significant for the seniors and their quality
of life. They are also important in terms of the vitality of the community, as seniors in general
and long term residents in particular are crucial to the stability and social cohesion in rural
communities, and are strongly motivated to contribute to the vibrancy and distinct culture of rural
areas.
Two seniors service hubs designed and opening by year end (Fitzroy Harbour, Constance Bay) (4) & (16)
There was a strong call through the consultation process for locally based one stop access that
would open the door to multiple programs and supports. Through the co-creation process, the
participants developed a service model which includes supports by local residents and
organizational support from WOCRC and partners in two local hubs (Fitzroy Harbour and
Constance Bay). It is an entirely new program delivery model for West Carleton and for the
WOCRC. The hubs will increase access to a range of services – from caregiver supports and flu
shot clinics to handyman services – with a service delivery model that combines formal and
informal supports and suits a rural approach. Seeing service providers face to face and working
in collaboration with community networks and volunteers matters in a rural community. The
hubs are bringing people together to help, even before they are launched, and the energy has
created a ripple effect (such as the internet working group and referrals through word of mouth).
A further outcome from the project was better understanding and confidence in the services
provided by WOCRC in their main location, with a measurable increase in use of these services as
a direct result of the community engagement process (17).
Improved transportation (5) & (6)
Transportation challenges were the number one problem identified in the consultations – access
and affordability. There were numerous stories of the impact on seniors when they no longer
were able to drive or when they driver on which they had relied was no longer available to them.
Polices around Paratranspo and the cost were a problem in some cases, and the WOCRC
transportation services were not well known and costly. The planning process resulted in more
volunteer drivers from the community and WOCRC changing its transportation policies and fee
structure to be more accessible and affordable to West Carleton residents. These changes were
important because they responded to the primary issue raised in the consultations and because
the enhanced transportation enables greater access to services and reduced isolation.
Improved communications networks for seniors (7)
The project led to improved communications networks in support of healthy aging. Word of
mouth is perhaps the most important means of communication in rural areas. The rural grapevine
worked positively to spread the word and generate interest in the project and continues to be an
important means to inform seniors of what is available and coming soon to West Carleton. Better
information about services has been made available through the libraries and community

19. 19
associations, as well as through a newly created directory of services. The project also led to the
development of new on-line vehicles for communication, including a new Facebook group for
seniors in West Carleton through which seniors have started to connect. This reflected a learning
from the process that the seniors population has many cohorts, including those who use internet
and those who don’t, so an effective initiative will need many different communication strategies.
Good communication and information is critical to seniors managing their health and well-being
by knowing the supports available to them. The networks are also instrumental in increasing
interest and awareness in aging issues in the rural communities and in focusing energy on working
together to find creative solutions tailored to needs.
Activities to improve internet access and increase capacity for seniors to use computers (11) & (20)
An unexpected outcome of the project was the new activity to improve internet access in the
rural areas, and increase the capacity of seniors to use computers to improve their quality of life.
Inequitable access to high speed internet in rural areas was a well documented concern prior to
the project. However, the planning process increased awareness of the importance of electronic
communication such as Internet in bringing services to seniors and in enabling them to connect
with family and friends.
New seniors’ social groups / programs including new seniors program in Constance Bay (8)
Through the planning process new social opportunities were created in local communities,
including a new weekly seniors program in Constance Bay. Opportunities for regular social
contact are a critical factor in health and well-being.
Volunteer handyman service (15)
Home maintenance was identified in the consultations as one of the five major challenges for
seniors in West Carleton. In response, the Men’s Ministry developed a volunteer handyman
service, with WOCRC providing the insurance coverage. It is an excellent model which provides a
diverse group of men in the community an opportunity to give back in a meaningful way and
provides a critical service to seniors from a source they can trust. The service will also develop a
referral service to trusted tradespeople who have gained the respect of local residents.
New leadership has emerged including but not limited to the Task Force (10)
“If you have the right leadership, people will follow and we see that.”
“We have strong relationships and work will together.”
New leaders have emerged from the community, including but not limited to the planning table.
The initiative was successful in getting some key people to commit their time and energy to these
projects. It focused the mind of leaders in the community to come up with creative solutions and
new ideas for programs and service delivery tailored to needs. The leadership included long-
standing leaders in the community as well as new faces, a critical factor in the vibrancy of the
various rural communities. The members of the planning table all had their own networks that
they mobilized in support of the goals. The planning table has evolved into a community-based
task force including seniors, caregivers, faith communities, education, business and
health/community service providers. It is becoming a new “local asset” to connect people and
activities.
Reduced cynicism and increased confidence with respect to the possibilities for residents to effect
positive changes in their rural communities (9)

20. 20
“People didn’t believe something would happen, but now we have made concrete changes. So
this is the tipping point.”
Participants in the evaluation meeting felt the community planning process had been very
important in reducing cynicism about the ability of rural residents to have control and influence
in how their communities developed. The amalgamation of the rural areas into the City of Ottawa
many years ago has left a legacy of frustration and alienation in terms of decision making, urban
models of service transplanted to rural communities and a perceived lack of respect for the
uniqueness of rural communities. “We’ve watched the City wrestling with problems for 10 or 15
years – and it’s faceless. Now we are able to list a couple of things that have been delivered and
we can identify a name of someone who was dealing with that issue.” Participants felt that Fitzroy
Harbour and Constance Bay, in particular, were driving the changes they wanted and igniting the
potential for more appropriate strategies to come. A sense of control and confidence is a critical
component of a vibrant community. “It has been brought down to the community level and
there’s a face and something happening and real change. It’s great progress.”
What do participants identify as the most significant change from the initiative?
Participants in the evaluation meeting identified three outcomes as the most significant among the 20
outcomes:
 The new services for seniors (the service hubs (4) and new transportation options (5)), and
 The increase in volunteering and community connections (1).
The services are seen as critical to supporting seniors to stay in the community as they age, which was the
focus of the project. They are appropriate to the rural culture and are viewed as more sustainable due to
the partnerships between formal agencies and community networks. Supporting seniors to age in the
community is better for the seniors and better for the communities.
The increase in volunteering and community connections contributes directly to a more vibrant rural
community and the strengthening of social capital, which is the heart of rural life.
How do the identified outcomes relate to the Rural Community Vitality Framework?
The table below shows how the outcomes identified by participants relate to the domains in the Rural
Community Vitality Framework. Because the aging-in-place process used a community development
approach, incorporating asset-based community development and co-production of services, the
planning process itself contributed to increased rural community vitality in West Carleton (as distinct from
activities that will be implemented in the future): 13 of the outcomes positively impacted the domain of
“services and amenities”; 12 positively impacted the domain of “community and belonging”;
10 positively impacted the domain of “demographic trends” (improved aging in place); 8 positively
impacted “civic and political engagement”; 3 positively impacted the domain of “economy and
employment” and 2 positively impacted the domain of “community safety”.

21. 21
Mapping Outcomes to the Rural Community Vitality Domains
Rural Vitality Domains
Demographic
Trends
Servicesand
Amenities
Communityand
Belonging
Economyand
Employment
Civic&Political
Engagement
Community
Safety
Outcomes
Increased volunteering and community
relationships
Increased partnerships
Seniors better able to manage their health
Two service hubs for seniors
Transportation supports at WOCRC
Transportation supports – volunteer drivers
New seniors social group
Reduced cynicism re positive change
Increased community leadership
Work to improve access to high speed internet
Improved connections between community groups
Exploring options for more affordable housing
Increased knowledge of existing services
New volunteer handyman service
Increased caregiver support programming
WOCRC better used by seniors
Increased awareness/interest in rural aging issues
Increased investment
Volunteers helping seniors with computers

22. 22
Did the initiative meet the outcomes set out in the proposal to the Rural Ontario Institute?
The key issue in terms of accountability is whether the project met the objectives agreed to with the
funder. The initiative has met all the outcomes and products set out in the agreement between WOCRC
and the Rural Ontario Institute, who funded the planning process. The table below links the outcomes set
out in the agreement with the outcomes identified by participants.
Outcomes and Products Set Out in the Agreement with ROI Related Outcome
Number(s)
Develop a common understanding of supporting factors and barriers to aging
in place
3, 12 18
Residents identify issues in West Carleton 3, 10 18
Develop shared goals and objectives for supporting aging in place in West
Carleton
2, 4 5 6, 8, 12
Determine community readiness to support aging in place in West Carleton 1 2, 10, 12
Create partnerships to support sustainable immediate to long-term strategies
to address needs
2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12
Develop and implement projects designed and phased to achieve the
objectives
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 15,
16
Support broad community participation in the ongoing support of aging in
place
1, 6, 10, 12, 15, 18,
20
Increase community capacity to improve the lives of seniors receiving services
and community members providing the on-going support
1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 12, 19
Participants empowered and given the opportunity to acquire skills to
influence the services in their community
1, 2, 7, 9, 10, 11, 18,
20
Ensure a sense of resident ownership, which is pivotal to success 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, 18
Product: Complete an evaluation of the project and the engagement process This report
What was the specific contribution of WOCRC in achieving the outcomes?
WOCRC was central in the following:
 Designing the community consultation process in a manner consistent with good community
engagement and asset-based community development approaches
 Soliciting and managing the resources for the planning process and some of the on-going activities
 Introducing and leading the concept of co-production of services
 Helping to identify services and agencies that could be part of the aging-in-place plan
 Connecting stakeholders (in collaboration with others)
 Serving as the secretariat (taking minutes, organizing meetings, managing communications, etc.)
 Undertaking many of the negotiations with partners to define contributions
 Undertaking an internal process to re-organize their own seniors’ services
 Providing organizational and programmatic resources for some of the initiatives, such as insurance
for the Volunteer Home Maintenance initiative.

23. 23
Evaluation Findings: What Did We Learn?
Critical Success Factors In Supporting Healthy Aging In Rural Places
• Social capital (who the individual knows, peers
connecting and the network of groups involved) is very
important in supporting healthy aging in a community.
Neighbour-to-neighbour supports for seniors can be
enhanced when a community focuses the existing
social capital (networks, personal connections etc.)
more strategically.
• Access to existing services can be increased when
resident leaders and services work together,
particularly providing better information about what is
available (using the informal communication networks
in the community), building comfort through personal
relationships and increasing the trust of residents in
services. Through the regular contact, the services can
better understand how they could modify their services
to be more accessible and responsive to local needs.
• Using a co-creation design strategy, developed with the
support of key champions and assets in the community, is essential to successful, appropriate and
sustainable implementation of service delivery in a rural setting (including combining supports from
funded agencies and properly supported community volunteer networks).
• If an organization is committed to being place-based and strives to equitably provide a level of service,
it must be a part of the fabric of the community.
• Seeing someone face to face matters in rural communities (re engagement and utilization of services).
• “Seniors” have many cohorts, e.g. those who use the internet and those who will not use the internet.
• If you have the right leadership, people will follow. In this case, the “right” leadership included trusted
leaders in the community (the local doctor and ministers) and the community development worker
who had been enabled to develop relationships over several years. As well, the leadership of local
groups had strong relationships and worked well together.
Critical Success Factors In Supporting Rural Community Vitality
• The seniors’ population has a unique and critical role in terms of rural community vitality. They tend
to be a rapidly growing population in rural communities. Long time rural residents are strongly
motivated in preserving the distinctness of rural communities and are often central in the leadership
of local groups and networks. The population provides opportunities in supporting local economic
resiliency. It is critical to rural community vitality that the local seniors’ population be enabled to aged
well in the local community.
• Social capital (the groups and networks in the community) is a critical component of rural community
vitality. These are the human resources that can be mobilized to achieve improvement on priority
issues such as healthy aging in place.
“Although service provision will
always be an important part of the
work of Community Resource Centres,
many of the issues faced by the
communities they serve will never be
(and should never be) solved by
providing services. Communities have
a great number of assets and
community development seeks to
build the social capital that allows
communities to be more resilient and
dynamic.”
One World (July 2013). A Rural
Community Development Strategy for
Ottawa’s Community Resource
Centres. Ottawa, pg. 8.

24. 24
• Approaches designed externally (esp. in urban settings) are often not effective in rural areas. Rural
communities may need community development support to help them navigate and influence
bureaucracies (including policies of service agencies which may not work well for rural communities).
A Distinct Model for Rural Community Development
Community development is very different in rural neighbourhoods compared to urban neighbourhoods.
Effective work in the rural areas requires a great deal of time and flexibility. The model of connecting
“webs” of trusted people who know people in the community or the issues is very effective. However,
this requires several years of groundwork to get to know the formal and informal community networks
and to build relationships and trust .xix
The work requires a long-term investment up front to develop and
nurture these community relationships which will ultimately build up connections with social networks
and facilitate the work.
A critical role is partnership development and linking services to groups of local residents. The goals for
partnership development are to leverage resources to support local initiatives and to increase access to
existing services. There are several challenges to partnership development in rural areas, including the
shortage of resources to support access across the huge area, a lack of understanding of the rural
approach/sensibilities and competition in relation to tight resources. For access to services to actually be
increase, the services may need to make policy or program changes to align with rural realities.
Co-creation of solutions is essential to finding appropriate and
sustainable solutions. An important part of the community
development role is resource development (cash and in-kind /
partnerships) with the stakeholders, around the collaboratively
designed solutions.
Key elements of the rural community development process
are summarized in the diagram.
Critical success factors in the aging-in-place planning
process included:
 using an asset / strengths approach;
 focusing on one issue that has broad resonance
 building relationships and connections (social capital);
o connecting “webs” of people who know people
in the community;
o ensuring diverse ways for residents to engage;
o face-to-face, following up and showing up are important activities. This requires a generous
mileage budget, but rural residents appreciate to be personally reached out to and to have
the opportunity to attend planning sessions;
o building on existing organizations and local leadership (e.g. sharing the project at regularly
scheduled meetings of existing trusted groups);
o expanding the connections with community associations, groups and service providers;
o building partnerships with agencies;
 co-creation of solutions;

25. 25
 increasing the capacity of key community organizations and individual leaders to initiate / sustain
their own activities (particularly by leveraging resources/partnerships);
 building capacity of existing stakeholders for sustainability (e.g. leveraging funds / insurance coverage
/ space to support implementation by local residents); and
 celebrating small wins.
Next Steps
The Task Force has evolved into a community steering committee which will guide implementation of the
community strategy. Western Ottawa will support the group and continue to be the anchor agency for
the initiative. Partnership development is continuing.
The two new service hubs and the volunteer handyman services are scheduled to launch before the end
of 2016. WOCRC is launching the three year Federally funded project to support training of “community
helpers” aimed at reducing the rate of isolation among seniors. The additional volunteer initiatives
launched or expanded during the planning process are continuing (volunteer drivers, new social group,
volunteers helping re computers, information sharing and peer support).
Sub-groups are continuing to develop new or expanded activities including a more robust communications
plan, activities to improve aspect to high speed internet, improved supports for caregivers, and
development of a rural model for affordable, supportive housing.

26. 26
Appendix 1: Snapshot of New and Strengthened Partnerships
Legend
Original
partner
The Rev. Steve Moore,
Bethel St. Andrews
United Church (FH)
West Carleton Family
Health Team
Western Ottawa
Community Resource
Centre
The Rev. Monique
Stone, Anglican
Parish of Huntley
Strengthened
relationship
City Councillor Eli El-
Chantiry (Ward 5)
Anglican Diocese of
Ottawa
Constance Bay
Community Association
Dunrobin Women’s
Institute
Constance Bay
Legion
New
relationship
New group
Not yet actively
engaged
Chartwell Seniors
Housing
Kinburn Seniors
Group
Men’s Ministry
Nursing Program
at Algonquin
City of Ottawa
Aging PlanWC Seniors
Facebook Group
Fitzroy Harbour
Working Group
Home Maintenance
Volunteers
Seniors Social
Group (CB)
Ottawa Public
Health
Rural Ottawa Seniors
Support Services
Community
Care Access
Alzheimer’s
Society
Computer and
IT Volunteers
United Church Women
(Fitzroy Harbour)
City of
Ottawa Rural
Affairs
EDGE

27. 27
Appendix 2: Rural Vitality Framework and Baseline Data
Demographic Trends
The starting point for community vitality is the characteristics of the local population. It is desirable to
have a balance of age groupings, with an appropriate “dependency ratio” (working age population to non-
working age population). Diversity is a positive characteristic. (Superscript numbers identify the source.)
West Carleton Ottawa
Population change 1
Map 13
(For West Carleton: Avg. by 4 Census Tracts in West Carleton)
9.8 8.8
% of population that moved into the community in the last 5
years2
Map 24
27.5 41.9
Age structure (Maps 14, 16 to 20)
 % of population aged 0 – 19 1
Maps 18 and 20
 % of the population aged 65+ 1
Maps 1 to 4
 Median age 1
26.4
11.0
43
23.4
13.2
39.2
Dependency ratioxx 2
59.9 57.8
Retention of youth Not available N/A
Official language minority: % of the population speaking French
most often at home 1
2.2 10.4
% of the population with a disability (activity limitation) 2
Map 10 17.1 18.6
% of population who are immigrants 2
Map 21 10 23.4
% of families who are lone parent families 2
8.6 16.1
% of the population living alone 2
Maps 5 and 6 5.1 11.5
Ottawa’s rural population is growing at a faster rate than the Ottawa average, mainly as a result of new
housing developments. The average age of residents in rural communities around Ottawa is above the
Ottawa average, and increasing very rapidly.xxi

28. 28
Services and Amenitiesxxii
The availability of basic amenities and services are a critical component of vibrant communities.
West Carleton Ottawa Avg.
Housing
 Housing affordability: % of households paying 30% or
more of income on housing cost 2
Map 30
 % of housing in need of major repairs 2
Map 31
 Number of social and affordable housing units per 1000
residents 3
 Rental vacancy rate (2015) 4
18.9
6.2
0.1
5.2 (Nepean Sub-
Region
22.7
6.2
24.4
3.4
Transportation
 Mean community duration 2
Map 32
 Avg. distance to nearest public bus stop/route3
Map 34
From 25.2 to 40.2
From 12.6 to 34.4
20.9
Not available
Average distance to nearest grocery store (km) 3
Map 33 From 10.3 to 32.6 4
Health services
 Average distance to a hospital
 Number of physicians per 1000 residents 3
 Average distance to nearest physician (km) 3
Map 10
 % of population over 12 with a regular medical doctor 5
 Average distance to a pharmacy (km) 3
Map 34
Not available
0.9
From 1.8 to 22.5
Not available
From 5.4 to 22.3
Not available
1.2
2.8
90.9
1.7
Schools Map 35
 Avg. distance to nearest Eng. elementary school (km) 3
 Avg. distance to nearest Fr. elementary school (km) 3
From 5.1 to 10.7
From 10.3 to 32.6
2.1
4.9
Potable water: # of Adverse water quality incidents Not availablexxiii
Not available
Internet access 6
Close to 95% Not available
Childcare Map 35
 Number of childcare programs per 1000 people 3
 Average distance to a child care program (km) 3
0
From 4.7 to 13.1
2.1
2.8
# of partnerships in support of priority issues 7
42 Not available
Distance and transportation are significant factors in West Carleton. (See Maps 11 and 12 for average
distances from downtown and Map 34 for average distances to a Park and Ride site.) There is very limited
or no public transportation and residents rely on cars to get from place to place. Most of the working
population commute by car to urban Ottawa for work. Transportation was identified as one of the most
significant challenges in the aging-in-place planning.
Ottawa’s rural communities, including West Carleton, are under-serviced (Map 34). Access to basic
amenities such as medical services, food and other types of supports are concerns. Access to health, social
and community services is limited, and in the case of seniors’ services, almost non-existent. Many services
which are supposed to be City-wide are not reaching West Carleton.

29. 29
Community and Belonging
It is important to consider “Community and Belonging” at the level of the community and of the individual,
as well as to monitor objective and subjective measures. Connectedness, belonging and isolation of
individuals and the capacity of neighbourhoods to respond to issues and address challenges (i.e. the
effectiveness of the social connections) are both strongly affected by issues such as the incidence of
poverty, discrimination and stressful situations (e.g. recent immigration). The SPCO has developed a
Neighbourhood Inequality Indexxxiv
, comprised of seven indicators which research has found to influence
the ability of communities to respond to issues. The index can be used to compare neighbourhoods and
monitor change over time in a particular neighbourhood/community.
Community and belonging are strongly related to “social capital”, i.e. “who you know”. For individuals,
social capital is made up of the people, networks and groups with which they are involved. For
communities, social capital is the organizations, collective activities, networks, relationships and norms
(such as trust) that people share. Social capital has its’ own intrinsic value and also serves as a resource
that connects people and communities to resources. Research has found that social capital is a key
element in rural revitalization. Rural communities commonly have strong social capital related to shared
identity and social groups. However, rural communities often have challenges with “bureaucratic and
market” (e.g. connections to help navigate agencies, governments and business markets outside the
immediate community). In the modern context, these are key to accessing resources.xxv
The aging-in-
place planning process highlighted that some agency policies did not fit with rural realities, which resulted
in West Carleton residents not being connected to services available in urban and sub-urban Ottawa.
The Canadian Index of Wellbeing identifies why community and belonging matter at the individual level.
“People’s sense of belonging to a community, their attitudes towards others, the strength of relationships
with family and friends, and opportunities to develop and participate in community activities have been
shown to foster individual and community wellbeing. … Social networks are often formed around shared
interests or needs, and members can include family, friends and neighbours from whom or to whom a
person gives or receives emotional, physical, financial or informational support.”xxvi
In recent years there has been an increased interest in addressing issues of isolation and loneliness, both
of which are closely related to community and belonging. Isolation among seniors is of particular concern.
“Social isolation touches many aspects of seniors’ lives, such as active participation, community
engagement, healthy aging, income security and caregiving needs. Social isolation can lead to depression
and increased vulnerability to elder abuse, among other concerns. The lack of supportive social networks
is linked to an increase in the risk of dementia and cognitive decline.”xxvii
West Carleton Ottawa Avg.
% providing unpaid care to others Not available Not available
Only has someone to provide/give advice about a crisis
some, little, or none of the time (aged 55+) 5
Not available 22.8%
Only has someone to help with daily chores some, little,
or none of the time (aged 55+) 5
Not available 19.2%

30. 30
Only has someone to listen to them some, little, or none
of the time (aged 55+) 5
Not available 13.2%
Frequency of participation - family/friendship activities,
only once per year or never (aged 55+) 5
Not available 12.9%
Sense of belonging to local community, somewhat strong
or very strong (aged 12 years and over), 2014 5
Not available 65
Neighbourhood inequality index 2
From 0 to 2 0
In general, in rural areas, adult long term residents have a strong sense of belonging (related to the strong
social capital). Rural seniors, for example, may have strong connections with neighbours, peers and
family, but these networks may not be effective in connecting them into services which they need, such
as Community Care Access. However, they may experience challenges with respect to effective
connections with institutions such as agencies providing services or navigating municipal bureaucracies.
Economy and Employment
The health of the local economy is essential to the vitality of the community, without which residents,
especially youth, often choose to leave in pursuit of better opportunities. The rate of unemployment, the
incidence of poverty, as well as the income gap (difference between rich and poor) are key determinants
of personal and community well-being. Local capacity to support economic development is critical to
vitality.xxviii
Economic diversity enables the community to weather downturns in distinct economic sectors.
West Carleton Ottawa
Income
 % living below the Low Income
Measure – After Tax 2010 2
Map 22
 % in the bottom decile of adjusted
after tax family income 2
Map 22A
 Median income (after tax) 2
 % of income from government
transfers 2
8.3
3.7
From $24,565 to $51,656
From 7.2 to 23.7
12.1
8.5
$35,123
11.6
Economic capacity: Human Resources
 Unemployment rate 2010 2
Map 27
 % working full-time (of population
that worked in 2010 2
 % without high school completion 2
 % aged 25 to 64 with post-secondary 2
Map 25
 % of labour force by industry (NAICS
code): Top 3 sectors 2011 2
Map 28
5.6
79.9
12.9
72.9
Public administration
(14.9%)
Professional, scientific and
technical services (11.9%)
Construction (9.5%)
7
80.3
12.9
74.6
Public administration
(23.4%)
Healthcare and social
assistance (10.2%)
Retail trade (10%)

31. 31
Economic capacity: Entrepreneurship
 Level of self-employment 2
 Level of non-primary employment
 % of labour force in agriculture,
forestry, fishing and hunting (NAICS) 2
Map 29
 Number of business establishments 8
o % with employees 8
Map 27
 Business establishments by sector:
Top 3, December 2015 8
Map 27
15.3
97.3
2.7
3,684
31.5
Professional, scientific and
technical services (22.4%)
Construction (18.4%)
Retail trade (11.9%)
9.3
99.4
0.5
63,706
30.7
Professional, scientific
& technical services
(21.3%)
Real estate and rental
and leasing (19.8%)
Health care and social
assistance (11.7%)
Economic capacity: Business Environment
 Average distance to nearest healthy
financial service (km) 3
Map 34
 Proximity to urban centre Maps 11, 12
 Access to industrial parks
 Level of commercial shopping
From 5.1 to 14.7
Up to 50 km.
Not available
Not available
2.8
Not applicable
Not available
Not available
Economic capacity: Infrastructure
 Avg. distance to nearest Eng. high
school (km) 3
Map 35
 Avg. distance to nearest Fr. high
school (km) 3
Map 35
 Level of communications (internet)
 Access to public transportation Map
34
 Water / sewage service levels
From 7.1 to 24.9
From 21.3 to 42.6
See Services and Amenities
From 12.6 to 34.4
Not available
4.3
7.9
See Srvcs & Amenities
Not available
Not available
West Carleton has lost many local businesses that provide important basic services like stores for food,
gas and other necessities. The two top industries in which residents work are strongly related to the urban
and suburban economy. A report published in 2000 found that Ottawa had greater farming revenue than
Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Edmonton, and Calgary combined, with approximately 10,000 jobs
associated with agriculture in Ottawa’s economy.xxix
However, the Census of Agriculture figures show that
family farm is becoming less common, with much of the agriculture transitioning to larger company farms.
Only 2.7% of West Carleton’s labour force work in agriculture and forestry.
Civic and Political Engagement
The Canadian Index of Well-being identifies democratic engagement as an important component of
community well-being. “Democratic engagement means taking part in the democratic process through
political institutions, organizations, and activities. … Citizen engagement in political activity is an

32. 32
important part of democratic engagement. Citizens should feel invited and encouraged to take part in
political and civic activities in more ways than just voting.”xxx
“The benefits of volunteering and giving are broad for society. Volunteering has a direct impact on the
lives of Canadians, whether it is teaching and supporting children, providing health care, or supporting
and giving companionship. Research has suggested that volunteerism, by bringing together persons from
all walks of life to work on a common project or objective, contributes to “social cohesion” or “social
capital” – for example, by increasing social trust, reciprocity and sense of belonging in communities (Wu
2011).”xxxi
West Carleton Ottawa
% Volunteering in the past 12 months (aged 15+) 9
N/A 47.2%
% of tax-filers who donated in 2013 10
Map 36 28.4 27.4
Donation amount per capita (of donors) 10
$1,177.18 $1,523.45
Electoral participation: Voter turnout at last elections
 Federal (Kanata-Carleton Electoral Dist., 2015) 11
 Provincial (Carleton Mississippi Mills, 2014) 12
 Municipal (Ward 5, 2014) 13
79
64.4
46.1
77.4
52.3
39.9
When the rural communities around Ottawa were amalgamated into the City of Ottawa, it profoundly
changed the way the communities were organized and represented politically, as well as the way services
were delivered. For example, before the amalgamation, many rural services operated on a volunteer
basis and worked with local volunteers. After amalgamation, many of these volunteers were replaced with
City employees with an urban perspective. Part of the legacy of amalgamation has been more than a
decade of challenging relationships between the rural communities and “City Hall”, often characterized
by frustration and a feeling of alienation by long-time rural residents. Many in the rural areas have felt a
loss of political voice and influence, as their unique perspectives and culture are subsumed by the more
populous urban areas. The relationship had challenged the long-standing tradition of collective action by
residents to address issues. This was an important context for the aging-in-place planning project.
Community Safety
The Canadian Index of Wellbeing (CIW) identifies community safety as “an important factor when thinking
about the quality of life in communities. For the CIW, community safety includes being safe from crime
and violence, being free from the threat of injury or harm, and feeling safe in the neighbourhood, the
larger community, and in the outdoor environment.”xxxii
Injuries are one of the leading causes of premature death and disability in Ottawa. In fact, an average of
51 people die annually from falls, with most of these being seniors. The vast majority of unintentional
injuries are preventable. The most prevalent types of injuries are falls, motor vehicle traffic collisions,
unintentional poisoning and substance misuse, and self-harm and suicide.xxxiii
West Carleton-March
(Ward 5)
Ottawa
Crime Severity Index 14
17.4 44

33. 33
Crimes against the person (per 100,000), 2015 14
164.1 543
Crimes against property (per 100,000), 2015 14
1,054 2,295.5
Criminal Code Traffic Offences (per 100,000), 2015 14
62.5 85.8
Other Criminal Code Offences (per 100,000), 2015 14
54.7 397.1
Emergency department visits for all unintentional injuries
per 100,000 3
(for the ONS neighbourhoods in W.C.)
From 1,497 to 13,159 7,362
In West Carleton-March, crimes against the person and other criminal code offences were down in 2015
compared to 2014. Crimes against property (mainly theft under $5,000) and criminal code traffic offences
(mainly impaired operation of a vehicle) were up compared to 2014. Crime in West Carleton-March is
significantly less than in Ottawa as a whole.
Unintentional injuries in some of the West Carleton neighbourhoods are significantly above the Ottawa
average.
Sources for the data in the Rural Vitality Index:
1
Statistics Canada, 2011 Census Profile, 2011, accessed from the Community Data Consortium.
2
Statistics Canada, 2011 National Household Survey Profile, accessed from the Community Data
Consortium.
3
Ottawa Neighbourhood Study under their Terms of Use, accessed at
http://neighbourhoodstudy.ca/neighbourhoods/. Where a range of data is provided, it refers to the
minimum and maximum for the 8 ONS neighbourhoods which comprise West Carleton (Carp, Carp
Ridge, Constance Bay, Corkery, Dunrobin, Fitzroy, Galetta, and Kinburn). Where one figure is provided,
it has been calculated from the sum of the 8 neighbourhoods.
4
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2015). Rental Market Report. Ottawa-Gatineau CMA
Ont.xxxiv
5
Statistics Canada, Canadian Community Health Survey 2011, accessed at
http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a05.
6
City of Otttawa (2010). Equity and Inclusion Lens Diversity Snapshot: Rural Residents. Ottawa:
author, p. 5.
7
Ottawa Neighbourhoods Social Capital Forum (2015). Rural Community Development Case Study
2015. Ottawa: Social Planning Council of Ottawa.
8
Statistics Canada, Canadian Business Counts, establishment and location counts, employment size and
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), December 2015.
9
Statistics Canada, General Social Survey, 2014.
10
Statistics Canada, Taxfiler Data (T1FF), 2013 for the 4 census tracts in West Carleton plus 1/3 of the 5th
census tract which includes Carp.
11
Elections Canada, accessed at
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=rep/off/42gedata&document=byed&lang=e
12
Unofficial result, accessed at Wikipedia at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carleton%E2%80%94Mississippi_Mills_(provincial_electoral_district)
13
City of Ottawa, accessed at http://ottawa.ca/election/index_en.html.
14
2014 - 2015 Crime Trends Ward 5 - West Carleton-March from the website of the Ottawa Police
Service. Accessed at https://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/crime/crime-stats.asp

34. 34
Appendix 3: Applying a Seniors Lens to Rural Community Vitality
Vision
To develop and implement an integrated approach to improving health, wellness and resilience at the
community level for older adults, caregivers and adults with disabilities in West Carleton.
Age structure (Maps 1 to 4)
 % of the population aged 65+ 1
 % of all seniors (65+) who are aged 65 to 74 1
 % of all seniors (65+) who are aged 75 to 84 1
 % of all seniors (65+) who are aged 85+ 1
11.0
65.9
27.6
6.1
13.2
53.8
32.2
14.0
Population Level Indicators
What are the most important population-level indicators re community vitality would should we monitor
in relation to supporting healthy aging-in-place in West Carleton. How are we doing on these measures?
West Carleton Ottawa
Demographic Trends
 % of population age 65+ that moved into the community
in the last 5 years2
Map 9
 % of the population aged 55+ with a disability (activity
limitation) 2
 % of the population aged 65+ with a disability (activity
limitation) 2
 % of the population aged 65+ living alone 2
Maps 5 and 6
8.9
32.9
40.4
15.4
16.6
36.9
45.0
23.6
Services and Amenities
Housing
 Housing affordability: % of households aged 55+ paying
30% or more of income on housing cost 2
Map 8
 Housing affordability: % of households aged 65+ paying
30% or more of income on housing cost 2
 Number of retirement homes per 1000 residents 3
 Number of long term care homes per 1000 residents 3
Transportation
 Avg. distance to nearest public bus stop/route3
Map 34
Health services
 Average distance to nearest physician (km) 3
Map 10
 Average distance to a pharmacy (km) 3
Map 34
5.3
3.6
0
0
From 12.6 to 34.4
From 1.8 to 22.5
From 5.4 to 22.3
19.4
20.1
0.1
0
Not available
2.8
1.7

35. 35
Community and Belonging
 % of the population providing unpaid care to seniors
 Only has someone to provide/give advice about a crisis
some, little, or none of the time (aged 55+) 5
 Only has someone to help with daily chores some, little,
or none of the time (aged 55+) 5
 Only has someone to listen to them some, little, or none
of the time (aged 55+) 5
 Frequency of participation - family/friendship activities,
only once per year or never (aged 55+) 5
 Sense of belonging to local community, somewhat strong
or very strong (aged 65 years and over), 2014 5
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
Not available
22.8%
19.2%
13.2%
12.9%
73.2
Economy and Employment
Income: % aged 65+ living below the Low Income Measure –
After Tax 2010 2
Map 7 2.1 8.7
Civic and Political Engagement
% Volunteering in the past 12 months (aged 15+) 9
N/A 47.2%
Community Safety
Emergency department visits for falls per 100,000 3
(for the ONS
neighbourhoods in W.C.)
From 1,352 to
5,109
2,389
The Story Behind the Indicators
Demographic Trends
 Although there is a slightly lower percentage of seniors in West Carleton compared to Ottawa
overall, seniors in West Carleton face distinct challenges compared to seniors in urban Ottawa,
particularly in terms of access to services.
 It is critical to understand and address the range of disabilities among the seniors’ population.
Dementia was of particular concern in this project.
 Many seniors live alone, and while not all seniors living alone are isolated, there is a growing
community concern about those seniors who are isolated.
Services and Amenities
 In general, the most important services and amenities to seniors in order of priority are: housing,
health services, pharmacy, having friends and family nearby, access to shopping, access to social
and recreational activities.xxxv
 In this aging-in-place planning process, participants added transportation was identified as one of
the most significant challenges in the aging-in-place planning project. Extremely limited
transportation options coupled with a lack of local shops for basic necessities reduces seniors’
options within their own community. The shortage of medical services and the distance to health
services affects seniors more than other age groups.
 The availability and organization of health and support services can make seniors more
vulnerable, and make a significant difference in their decision/ability to stay in their home or
not.xxxvi
For example, internet access and ability to use a computer are becoming increasingly
important for accessing services.

36. 36
Community and Belonging
 As with many rural neighbourhoods, West Carleton had very strong social networks and groups
(i.e. social capital), extensive formal and informal volunteering and a culture of self-reliance. The
community leaders had excellent experience using these connections to mobilize the community
to improve quality of life. The project built on a tradition of strong community involvement by
long time rural residents, and the energy of many residents newer to rural living.
 The challenge was in relation of the efficacy of these connections to connect with needed services
– from agencies or the City of Ottawa. In the issue for West Carleton’s rural seniors was not
whether they had a strong sense of belonging, but “How many people do you know who can
connect you with the resources you need to be able age in a healthy way in this community?”
 According to a 2012 International Federation of Aging report commissioned by Employment and
Social Development Canada (ESDC), the number one emerging issue facing seniors in Canada is
keeping older people socially connected and active.xxxvii
“Socially isolated seniors are less able to
participate and contribute to their communities. Yet seniors benefit from volunteering and
participating in their communities due to a sense of satisfaction and efficacy, and communities
benefit from the services and social capital seniors are providing. A decrease in contributions by
seniors is a significant loss to organizations, communities and society at large.”xxxviii
 During the planning process, Western Ottawa Community Resource Centre was approved for a
three year project to reduce seniors isolation in Ottawa’s rural communities, including W.C.xxxix
Economy and Employment
 Seniors poverty is less prevalent in West Carleton than in Ottawa overall. Nonetheless, aging-in-
place strategies need to be inclusive of different income levels.
 A growing senior population can pose some challenges and necessitate some adjustments, but it
also presents significant opportunities for economic growth. Consider job creation related to
seniors’ house and yard work, home care and support services, health services and recreation.
Civic and Political Engagement
 “Volunteering and giving can also benefit volunteers and donors themselves. For example,
volunteers can acquire skills and knowledge, such as management skills, communication or
teaching skills, or knowledge of current social or political issues. Some research has even shown
that volunteering and giving can contribute to the improved well-being and health of volunteers
and donors (Jenkinson, et al., 2013; Dunn, et al., 2008).”xl
 Although there is a long tradition of volunteering in the community, the first year of the rural
community development project exposed a vulnerability with respect to existing supports and
models of service for rural seniors. Currently there is a high dependence on seniors being able to
drive themselves or on volunteer drivers, who are themselves aging. Transportation in the area
is significantly dependent on strong social capital (especially neighbour and volunteer drivers).
The aging-in-place plan will have to grapple with the implications of potentially fewer volunteer
drivers, as the population ages and some drivers are no longer able to drive.
Community Safety
 In Ottawa in general, there is a high occurrence of falls among seniors, particularly among elderly
women. For seniors, most falls happen at home, and the most common ones are those occurring
from slips, trips or stumbles; falls from beds, chairs or other furniture; and falls involving stairs.xli

37. 37
Appendix 4: Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps: Healthy
Aging in Place
Map 1 Age Distribution of Senior Population in Rural West Carleton, Number of People
Map 2 Age Distribution of Senior Population in Rural West Carleton, Percent and Number of People
Map 3 Age Distribution of Senior Population in Rural West Carleton, Percent ad Number of People
Map 4 Percent Seniors Aged 65 and over Compared with the Average Percent for Ottawa and Number
of Seniors Aged 65 and over in Rural West Carleton Neighbourhoods
Map 5 Percent and Number of Seniors aged 65 and over Living Alone in Rural West Carleton compared
with the average for Ottawa
Map 6 Percent and Number of Seniors age 65 and over Living Alone in Rural West Carleton
Map 7 Median Income After Tax of Seniors age 65 and older in Rural West Carleton compared with the
average for Ottawa and Number of Seniors aged 55 and older living Below Low Income After Tax
Measure
Map 8 Percent and Number of Seniors aged 55 plus paying 30% or more of income on Housing Costs in
Rural West Carleton
Map 9 Percent and Number of Seniors who Moved in the past 5 years in Rural West Carleton
Map 10 Percent People with Daily Activity Limitations and the Average Distance to a Physician Office in
Rural West Carleton

38. 38
Map1

39. 39
Map2

40. 40
Map3

41. 41
Map4

42. 42
Map5

43. 43
Map6

44. 44
Map7

45. 45
Map8

46. 46
Map9

47. 47
Map10

48. 48
Appendix 4 Cont’d: Geographic Information System (GIS) Maps:
Rural Vitality
Map 11 Proximity of Rural West Carleton Neighbourhoods to the Ottawa City Centre
Map 12 Proximity of Rural West Carleton Neighbourhoods to the Ottawa City Centre
Map 13 Population Change from 2006 to 2011 in Rural West Carleton by Census Dissemination Areas
Map 14 Age Distribution of Population in Rural West Carleton, Percent and Number of People
Map 15 Total Population and Population Density in Rural West Carleton
Map 16 Age Distribution of Population in Rural West Carleton, Percent and Number of People
Map 17 Age Distribution of Population in Rural West Carleton, Number of People
Map 18 Percent of Youth Population aged 0 to 19 compared to the Average Percent for the Province of
Ontario, and Number of Youth Population aged 0 to 19 in Rural West Carleton
Map 19 Percent of Population aged 20 to 29 compared to the Average Percent for the Province of
Ontario and Number of Population Aged 20 to 29 in Rural West Carleton
Map 20 Youth Population Structure in Age Groups of 0 to 19 and 20 to 29 years in Rural West Carleton
Map 21 Percent Immigrant Population and Number of Recent Immigrants in Rural West Carleton
Map 22 Prevalence of Low Income in 2010 based on After-Tax Low Income Measure, % in Rural West
Carleton
Map 22A Percent of Population in the Bottom Decile of Adjusted After-Tax Family Income in Rural West
Carleton
Map 23 Median Income After Tax of Population in Rural West Carleton compared with the average for
Ottawa
Map 24 Percent and Number of Rural West Carleton Residents who Moved in the Past 5 Years
Map 25 Percent Population aged 25 to 64 years with Post-Secondary Certificate, Diploma or Degree and
Percent Participating in the Labour Force
Map 26 Labour Force Population of Rural West Carleton by Occupation
Map 27 Industries and Businesses in Rural West Carleton by Number of Employees and the
Unemployment Rate compared to the average for Ottawa
Map 28 Top Industries in which Resident of Rural West Carleton Work
Map 29 Industries and Businesses in Rural West Carleton by Number of Establishments and Percent
Residents working in Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting
Map 30 Percent of all Households Spending 30% or more of Household Total Income on Shelter Costs in
Rural West Carleton compared to the Average for Ottawa
Map 31 Percent of private dwellings, which were 30 years or older as of 2011 and Percent of occupied
private dwellings in need of major repairs in Rural West Carleton
Map 32 Median Commuting Duration and Mode of Transportation Travelling to Work in Rural West
Carleton
Map 33 Accessibility to some Facilities and Services in Rural West Carleton
Map 34 Number of Schools, Child Care Centres and Recreation Sites in Rural West Carleton
Map 35 Percent People Donating to Charities and the Total Amount of Donations in Rural West Carleton
Compared with the Average for Ottawa

49. 49
Map11

50. 50
Map12

51. 51
Map13

52. 52
Map14

53. 53
Map15

54. 54
Map16

55. 55
Map17

56. 56
Map18

57. 57
Map19

58. 58
Map20

59. 59
Map21

60. 60
Map22

61. 61
Map23

62. 62
Map24

63. 63
Map25

64. 64
Map26

65. 65
Map27

66. 66
Map28

67. 67
Map29

68. 68
Map30

69. 69
Map31

70. 70
Map32

71. 71
Map33

72. 72
Map34

73. 73
Map35

74. 74
Map36

75. 75
i
Until October 2016, the planning process focused on older adults. Adults with disabilities were added as an
additional target population at a meeting at the end of the planning process – in October 2016.
ii
Until October 2016, the planning process focused on older adults. Adults with disabilities were added as an
additional target population at a meeting at the end of the planning process – in October 2016.
iii
“Asset-based community development considers local assets as the primary building blocks of sustainable
community development. Building on the skills of local residents, the power of local associations, and the
supportive functions of local institutions, asset-based community development draws upon existing community
strengths to build stronger, more sustainable communities for the future.” Copied from the website of the Asset-
Based Community Development Institute, accessed November 28, 2016 at http://www.abcdinstitute.org/
iv
Broadly, the consultation process asked five questions:
 What are the most important issues to address?
 What assets can we build on?
 What can community members do best for themselves and each other?
 What can community members do best if they receive some support from organizations?
 What can organizations do best for communities that people can’t do for themselves?
v
“Co-production essentially describes a relationship between service provider and service user that draws on the
knowledge, ability and resources of both to develop solutions to issues that are claimed to be successful,
sustainable and cost-effective, changing the balance of power from the professional towards the service user. The
approach is used in work with both individuals and communities”. Copied from the website of the Scottish Co-
Production Network, accessed November 28, 2016 at http://www.coproductionscotland.org.uk/about/what-is-co-
production/
vi
For more information contact the Social Planning Council of Ottawa at office@spcottawa.on.ca.
vii
In 2016, the Rural Ontario Institute (ROI) launched the “Measuring Rural Community Vitality” project, a 30-
month applied research and analysis initiative focused on deepening understanding of effective practices for
quantifying rural civic engagement, social capital and community well-being. It will also demonstrate methods for
municipal evaluation of community impacts and social return on investment.
The viability and economic success of small towns and rural communities is closely related to a number of
intangible factors which are hard to measure but integral to municipal functions. The overarching goal of the
initiative is to assist rural stakeholders by undertaking projects which enable information sharing, capture
practitioner insights and lessons learned, and facilitate peer exchange of best practices surrounding these hard to
measure aspects. Taken from the website of the Rural Ontario Institute, accessed November 28, 2016 at
http://www.ruralontarioinstitute.ca/programs/measuring-community-vitality.
viii
City of Ottawa (2004). Ottawa Counts.
ix
Etuk, Lena. (2012) 2000 Baseline Assessment of Rural Community Vitality. Oregon State University.
http://agsci.oregonstate.edu/sites/agsci.oregonstate.edu/files/ruralstudies/pub/pdf/rsp_working_paper_12_01.p
df ;
x
Results Based Accountability (RBA) was the evaluation framework used for the project. The starting point for RBA
is to determine the current conditions as a baseline, to select the most important indicators among those
conditions, and to monitor those indicators/conditions over time. Our Rural Vitality Indicators Framework
establishes the parameters for the baseline.
xi
Grigsby, W.J. (2001). Community Vitality: Some Conceptual Considerations. Rural Development Paper No. 6. The
Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development. Pennsylvania State University. Accessed June 2016 at
http://aese.psu.edu/nercrd/publications/rdp/rdp6.pdf.
xii
As this was an evaluation project, not a research project, there was not the capacity to gather all the data. Some
fields have data “not available” but are presented in the Framework for future reference.
xiii
This was an evaluation project, not a research project. Therefore, there were not resources to gather data for all
indicators in the Rural Community Vitality Index and related Seniors Lens.
xiv
“Outcome Mapping” gathers information on the results of the change process, measured in terms of the
changes in behaviour, actions or relationships that can be influenced by the team or program. Outcome Mapping
unpacks an initiative’s theory of change, provides a framework to collect data on immediate, basic changes that

76. 76
lead to longer, more transformative change, and allows for the plausible assessment of the initiative’s contribution
to results. Copied from the Better Evaluation Website, accessed November 28, 2016 at
http://betterevaluation.org/en/plan/approach/outcome_mapping. Traditional outcome mapping links the
outcomes to a livelihoods framework. For this project, the evaluators linked the outcomes to the project goals and
objectives and the rural vitality framework.
xv
“Ripple Effect Mapping” is a participatory group method for evaluating the impact of complex programs or
collaboratives. The method engages program and community stakeholders to retrospectively and visually map the
"performance story" (Mayne, 1999) resulting from a program or complex collaboration. The REM process
combines elements of Appreciative Inquiry, mind mapping, group interviewing, and qualitative data analysis.
REM is not only a powerful tool for documenting both the intended and the unintended results of a program or
collaborative, but a way to engage and re-energize community members around shared goals.” Copied from the
website of the University of Minnesota Extension Program. Accessed November 28, 2016 at http://blog-ripple-
effect-mapping.extension.umn.edu/
xvi
“The Most Significant Change (MSC) approach involves generating and analysing personal accounts of change
and deciding which of these accounts is the most significant – and why. MSC is not just about collecting and
reporting stories but about having processes to learn from these stories – in particular, to learn about the
similarities and differences in what different groups and individuals value. … It provides some information about
impact and unintended impact but is primarily about clarifying the values held by different stakeholders.” Copied
from the Better Evaluation website, accessed November 28, 2016 at
http://betterevaluation.org/en/plan/approach/most_significant_change.
xvii
Copied from (Scottish) National Community Engagement Standards accessed November 24, 2016 at
http://www.voicescotland.org.uk/Seven-NS/
xviii
Grouping outcomes by themes is consistent with the methodology of “Outcome Harvesting”.
xix
Local food access projects were found to be an effective way of building trust and connecting with community
groups, in the community development work that occurred in the years just prior to the aging-in-place planning
process. Food projects, in addition to their inherent value with respect to food access, have proven to be a great
strategy to connect diverse people across issues and communities.
xx
Dependency ratio formula: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-229-x/2009001/demo/dep-eng.htm. The total
demographic dependency ratio is the ratio of the combined youth population (0 to 19 years) and senior population
(65 or older) to the working-age population (20 to 64 years). It is expressed as the number of "dependents" for
every 100 "workers": youth (ages 0 to 19) + seniors (age 65 or older) per 100 workers (aged 20 to 64).
DR = {(0-19) + (65+)} *100 / (20-64)
xxi
City of Ottawa. (2006) A Portrait of Ottawa Older Adults: Demographic and Socio-Economic Characteristics, p. 6.
Accessed at http://ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/cpsc/2011/08-18/07%20-%20Document%203%20-
%20Demographic%20and%20Socio-Economic%20Characteristics%20EN.pdf
xxii
Additional themes that could be included in “Services and Amenities are Environment and Arts & Culture.
xxiii
Most of West Carleton is serviced by private wells, with portions of Carp serviced by a community well. Water
quality can vary between urban and rural portions of the City.
xxiv
The Neighbourhood Inequality Index is comprised of the following seven variables:
 Poverty (below low income measure, after tax)
 Moved in during the previous year
 Housing in need of major repair
 Lone parent families as a % of all families with children
 Unemployment rate (of population aged 15 and over)
 Without high school completion
 Recent immigrants (arrived in the last 5 years)
A neighbourhood is “unequal” on a variable when the incidence of that variable is 10% or more higher than the
average for Ottawa. All neighbourhoods which are unequal on a variable could face capacity challenges in relation
to the average in Ottawa, but the degree of inequality is compounded, depending on the number of variables for

77. 77
which the neighbourhood is unequal. A neighbourhood which is even unequal on 7 variables is more unequal in
relation to all Ottawa neighbourhoods than a neighbourhood which is unequal on 3 variables.
xxv
Bill Reimer (2003). Social Capital as Social Relations: Implications for Community Development. Montreal:
Concordia University, pg. 3.
xxvi
From the website of the Canadian Index of Well-being, accessed at https://uwaterloo.ca/canadian-index-
wellbeing/what-we-do/domains-and-indicators/community-vitality-domain-components
xxvii
Employment and Social Development Canada. Release of National Seniors Council Report on the Social
Isolation of Seniors. News Release November 24, 2014. Accessed at http://news.gc.ca/web/article-
en.do?nid=907609.
xxviii
Our indicators for economic capacity are significantly based on the work of the New Rural Economy Project.
Visit http://nre.concordia.ca/.
xxix
Harry Cummings and Associates (2000). The Economic Impacts of Agriculture on the Economy of the City of
Ottawa Final Report. Guelph: author for the City of Ottawa.
xxx
From the website of the Canadian Index of Well-being, accessed at https://uwaterloo.ca/canadian-index-
wellbeing/what-we-do/domains-and-indicators/
xxxi
Martin Turcotte (2015). Volunteering and charitable giving in Canada. Catalogue no. 89-652-X2015001 ISBN
978-1-100-25385-5. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. Accessed at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-652-x/89-652-
x2015001-eng.htm
xxxii From the website of the Canadian Index of Well-being. https://uwaterloo.ca/canadian-index-wellbeing/what-
we-do/domains-and-indicators/community-vitality-domain-components#safety.
xxxiii
Ottawa Public Health. The Burden of Injury in Ottawa, 2010. Ottawa (ON): Ottawa Public Health; 2010., pp. 1
and 4.
xxxiv
Accessed at https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/64423/64423_2015_A01.pdf.
https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/catalog/productDetail.cfm?lang=en&cat=79&itm=33&fr=1480630014356
xxxv
Joseph, A.E., & Cloutier-Fisher, D. (2005). Aging in Rural Communities: Vulnerable People in Vulnerable Places.
In G.J. Andrew & D.R. Philips (Eds.) Aging in Place: Perspectives, policy, and practice (pp.133-146). London:
Routledge Studies in Human Geography.
xxxvi
Joseph, A.E., et al, Ibid.
xxxvii
International Federation of Aging. (2012). Current and Emerging Issues Facing Older Canadians. Retrieved from:
http://www.ifa-fiv.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/current-and-emerging-issues-facing-older-canadians-final-
report-30march-2012.pdf (July 2014).
xxxviii
National Seniors Council (2014). Report on the Social Isolation of Seniors 2013-14. Ottawa: Government of
Canada, pg. 7
xxxix
The project is funded by Employment and Social Development Canada, under the New Horizons for Seniors
Program. In addition to the activities in the Seniors Isolation Project, the evaluation will involve gathering data
from seniors on the five key indicators in relation to isolation, listed in the Rural Vitality Index.
xl
Martin Turcotte (2015). Volunteering and charitable giving in Canada. Catalogue no. 89-652-X2015001 ISBN
978-1-100-25385-5. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. Accessed at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-652-x/89-652-
x2015001-eng.htm
xli
Ottawa Public Health. The Burden of Injury in Ottawa, 2010. Ottawa (ON): Ottawa Public Health; 2010., pp. 1 and
4.