Getting There

Abstract

Advances in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) offer new opportunities for addressing transportation needs; however, past research suggests that opportunities are not equally shared by millions of low-income Americans. We draw from four empirical studies and two case studies to contribute descriptions of the 11 everyday transportation models currently used by residents of low-income and underserved communities to enhance their access to health-enhancing resources. These models fell into personal, private, public, and interpersonal categories. We contribute insights regarding the following barriers and facilitators associated with these models: (1) affordability; (2) individual capabilities; (3) interpersonal trust, care and/or reciprocity; (4) trust in technology; (5) service availability/eligibility; (6) spatial and temporal matches; (7) match between transportation mode and physical needs; (8) service reliability and quality; and (9) infrastructure access. To address these barriers and build on these facilitators, we contribute six supportive policy and design principles. Operationalizing these principles, we propose four new ICT-enhanced models: (1) smart jitneys; (2) generalized, favor-based models; (3) expanded resource pooling; and (4) transportation clubs. The focus of these models on socio-technical integration with current capabilities and resources holds promise for enhancing access to jobs, food, and health care for residents of low-income communities.

A community partnership to evaluate the feasibility of addressing food insecurity among adult patients in an urban healthcare system

“…Detroit is a city of few transit options and since transportation remains a significant barrier to Fig. 3 Results of difference-in-difference regression analysis for the 12-month follow-up period accessing medical care, we surmised it would be a barrier to accessing other social services and goods [27]. While addressing food insecurity has been tried before with food pharmacies and food stands, these intervention designs typically do not include food delivery [28].…”

Participation versus scale: Tensions in the practical demands on participatory AI

“…As HCI draws more deeply from the participatory action tradition, methods are usually applied at the scale of small groups in community centers or collaboratively facilitated by community members themselves (Harrington, et al, 2019;Dillahunt and Veinot, 2018). Harrington, et al, (2019) emphasized the importance of engaging communities as rooted within a specific locality: "We define community as settings where individuals share a geographic proximity in which they work and live, in addition to sharing access to resources.…”

Human technology intermediation to reduce cognitive load: understanding healthcare staff members’ practices to facilitate telehealth access in a Federally Qualified Health Center patient population

“…Human intermediaries are “…people who act in a ‘middle space’ between people and technologies, and perform the mediating work involved in enabling potential users to access, configure, understand, cope with, troubleshoot, and use patient-facing health technologies.” 14 Human technology intermediaries can be informal (eg, family, friends, and neighbors) or formal (eg, nonprofit organizations, volunteers, or staff). 15 …”