Background: Understanding how older Latin-American immigrants make their own mental health decisions is crucial to understanding their needs. However, current research is focused on psychiatric treatments instead of promotional and preventative approaches, which tend to be poorly utilised in clinical practice. Additionally, the mental health of older Latin-American immigrants in Australia has not been fully explored.

Materials and methods: This study aimed to determine and explain the factors that underlie mental health decision-making among community-dwelling older Latin Americans in Australia, addressing a gap in understanding their mental health needs. This study was conducted following a constructivist grounded theory approach. The inclusion criteria were Spanish-speaking immigrants aged 60 and older living in Australia. Twenty-three participants were included in this study. In-depth data analysis was undertaken. Ethical approval was obtained before data collection began.

Findings: Three key categories emerged: Overcoming loneliness, ageing healthily, and choosing one's own country. These categories are integrated into the core category of "Autonomous Decision-Making in Health." This framework illustrates how older Latin Americans approach mental health decisions, emphasising their strengths and challenges. They typically make decisions independently, valuing advice from trusted individuals and seeking information. Cultural factors significantly influence their decision-making.

Conclusion: Several psychosocial factors represent and outline the complexity of mental health decision-making in older Latin-American immigrants in Australia. Understanding these factors would improve understanding and offer the potential for elaborate, tailored promotional and preventive interventions for these populations, thus improving the quality of mental health care.

Australia’s preventative health system continues to face the challenge of fragmented, short-term funding that limits the scale, reach, and sustainability of prevention initiatives. These stop–start cycles particularly disadvantage culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities, where trusted relationships and consistent engagement are essential for meaningful health outcomes. To truly embed prevention on par with other national priorities, Australia requires long-term investment models that support stability, continuity, and cultural inclusion.

ECCQ’s Chronic Disease team have delivered the My health for life program to CALD communities exclusively since 2017. ECCQ have led a reliable chronic disease prevention program culturally tailored to meet the needs of Queensland’s diverse CALD communities. The program supports adults at high risk of developing chronic conditions to make sustainable lifestyle changes through evidence-based interventions. To strengthen equity, the program has been co-created with multicultural leaders, community health organisations, and bilingual facilitators. Consistent program delivery, culturally adapted materials, and trusted community partnerships have been central to this approach.

Through ongoing funding, ECCQ’s delivery of the My health for life has engaged over 2800 participants from more than 30 cultural backgrounds. The program’s longevity has built significant trust within CALD communities, resulting in improved health literacy, sustained behavioural change, and stronger connections to primary healthcare. Participants report greater confidence in managing health risks, and community partners highlight enhanced collaboration and continuity of care.

The success of the program underscores that long-term funded prevention programs foster the trust and relationships necessary for lasting impact. Sustainable investment models, mirroring Tasmania’s 20-Year Preventive Health Strategy, should prioritise continuity, community ownership, and cultural responsiveness to build resilient prevention systems capable of delivering long-lasting population health benefits.

Problem:
Although prevention programs are available, they are not commonly accessed by communities, revealing a gap in the reach and utilisation of prevention programs and the need for effective approaches to engage communities.

What you did:
Wellness my Way (WMW) addresses this gap by embedding prevention locally and building trust, awareness and collaboration between local organisations, community members, and prevention programs.

WMW leverages an existing Queensland Health service, Way to Wellness, to simplify access to prevention via a digital health assessment followed by personalised telephone-based coaching. Coaches connect individuals with programs aligned to their health goals, that are available locally in communities.

Central to implementation are ‘Connectors’ - community members who raise awareness, engage others, and integrate prevention into community life. By leveraging existing relationships and local context, Connectors ensure the program is delivered in ways that are relevant, trusted, and accessible. A locally tailored marketing campaign featuring community members further strengthened engagement and participation.

Wellness my Way is an initiative of the Queensland Government, delivered in partnership by Health and Wellbeing Queensland, Queensland Health’s Health Contact Centre, South West Hospital and Health Service, and The Health and Wellbeing Centre for Research Innovation at The University of Queensland.

Results:
Stakeholder feedback indicates Wellness my Way is an acceptable and effective approach to embedding prevention locally. The program has built trust and collaboration across sectors, breaking down silos and fostering shared ownership of prevention. Early findings show increased referrals and participation in prevention programs.

Lessons:
Wellness my Way demonstrates the value of leveraging local connections and community leadership in prevention. Supporting Connectors to engage their communities has fostered trust and ownership, highlighting the importance of investing in relationships to deliver preventive health initiatives that are locally relevant and enduring.

Policy/Practice:
Gippsland Region Public Health Unit (GRPHU) leads a coordinated regional approach to prevention through Healthy Gippsland. This shared identity seeks to bring together health promotion and prevention practitioners across the six local government areas in Gippsland, Victoria - Bass Coast, Baw Baw, East Gippsland, Latrobe, South Gippsland and Wellington. Healthy Gippsland aims to strengthen collaboration, align regional efforts, share resources, build workforce capability and amplify collective impact to improve health and wellbeing outcomes.

Problem:
Gippsland experiences some of the highest rates of disease and social disadvantage in Victoria, with avoidable deaths 21% higher than the state average and life expectancy lower (80.9 vs 83.5 years). While local organisations are committed to prevention, fragmented efforts, funding instability, and evolving governance structures limit progress and sustainability. Strengthening regional coordination is critical to scale prevention initiatives, improve system connectedness and resilience, and achieve sustained impact on complex public health challenges.

What you did:
In 2024 Healthy Gippsland was introduced as a shared identity for regional prevention, connecting practitioners passionate about improving population health. GRPHU has strengthened this collective through initiatives including the Gippsland Population Health Strategy 2024–29; a SharePoint site for resources and planning; an Outcomes Monitoring Dashboard to track progress; a Journal Club for evidence-sharing; place-based working groups addressing local needs; and a regional e-newsletter to keep us connected.

Results and lessons:
Formalising Healthy Gippsland as a regional alliance will strengthen commitment and accountability, whilst also providing a clear community interface. Ongoing partner consultation will ensure local contexts and priorities continue to shape the approach. Sustained commitment to collective impact principles, shared governance and continuous learning is essential to building a regional public health workforce and system capable of delivering scalable, sustainable, place-based initiatives. Healthy Gippsland has the potential to turn collaborative regional partnerships into a collective prevention movement.

It is widely accepted that ‘soft infrastructure’ within communities, such as narratives, relationships and trust, can make or break community-based initiatives. These are the type of resources that flow within and between community organisations; some are active, others are latent to be harnessed when the time is right. Within systems science, resources and their distribution are considered a critical component of the underlying causes of complex problems, such as chronic disease or obesity. Yet, there are few examples of studies that define and monitor soft infrastructure, alongside more traditional notions of community assets such as facilities or programs.

The study presented here is nested within the Pathways in Place project at Victoria University. Within our community-based work, we formed an action network of local organisations to collaborate, codesign, and implement actions to strengthen the local employment system – an important Social Determinant of Health, to bolster opportunities for work for young people in Melbourne’s West. The project, funded by the Paul Ramsay Foundation, included funding for community action which provided a unique opportunity to consider the relationship between funding coming into the community and resources already vested in the organisations and built over time.

We present our methodology (workshops and surveys) in defining and monitoring the flow of resources within the action network, alongside early findings. We consider the relationship between funding and community resources and argue that attention be paid to how outside funding can work to reconfigure community resources in the pursuit of population health. We elevate ‘soft infrastructure’, such as trust and community knowledge, to signal where ‘harm’ may lurk in community-based prevention efforts. We warn of unintended consequences and ponder what sustaining prevention means for the flow of resources within communities.

Problem:
Preventive health in Australia is often framed through individual behaviour change and system efficiency. Yet among multicultural and migrant communities, prevention is equally shaped by the social fabric of belonging, the feeling of being seen, valued, and connected. Isolation, cultural displacement, and identity loss are silent but powerful risk factors for chronic disease, poor mental health, and disengagement from preventive programs. This project explores how belonging itself can sustain prevention.

What Was Done:
Drawing on African principles of Ubuntu (“I am because we are”) and Australian multicultural health frameworks, this initiative proposes a Belonging Capital Index (BCI), a practical way to measure and strengthen cultural connection as a determinant of health. The project includes a Community Belonging Audit across three local government areas with high migrant populations. Through participatory co-design workshops, digital storytelling, and local partnerships, the audit will identify community assets that promote belonging and map how these influence engagement with preventive services such as immunisation, screening, and wellness programs.

Results:
Preliminary engagement shows that when preventive services intentionally create spaces of belonging, through cultural ambassadors, community narratives, and inclusive rituals, participation and trust increase. The emerging BCI framework offers a simple yet powerful method for embedding cultural continuity into policy and practice.

Lessons:
Belonging is not a soft concept; it is a sustainable preventive strategy. By investing in culture, connection, and community as foundations for prevention, Australia can move from short-term interventions to enduring wellbeing. Sustaining prevention begins when people see themselves reflected in the systems meant to protect them.

Background:

Multiple studies have highlighted that being of immigrant background is a risk factor for poor mental health among youth. Immigrant youth face heightened risks for major depression, anxiety disorders, substance misuse, behavioural problems, and poor psychological wellbeing due to acculturation, stress, discrimination, and structural barriers to care. Although evidence-based prevention programs are available, their uptake and scalability in immigrant communities remain limited without cultural adaptation. Community Advisory Boards (CABs) have been shown among multiple strategies to strengthen translation of research into practice by ensuring cultural relevance, trust, and system-level integration.

Methods:

We conducted a structured literature review (2010–2024) of peer-reviewed and gray literature on CAB use in adapting and implementing preventive mental health programs for immigrant and refugee youth. Databases searched included PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar, with keywords community advisory board, immigrant youth, prevention, implementation, and scale-up.

Results:

Eighteen studies demonstrated that CABs consistently improved program outcomes. CAB-guided adaptations—such as bilingual delivery, family-inclusive models, and identity-affirming activities—were associated with higher recruitment, stronger retention, and greater youth engagement compared to non-adapted interventions. Evidence also highlighted CABs as a mechanism for embedding programs into schools, health systems, and community organizations, facilitating scale-up beyond pilot projects. Challenges included sustaining CAB engagement and balancing fidelity to core program elements with local adaptations.

Conclusion:

The literature provides clear evidence that CABs are an effective, evidence-backed strategy for translating prevention research into equitable, scalable practice. By institutionalizing CABs within health and education systems, communities can move beyond small-scale pilots to sustainable models of preventive mental health care that addresses disparities and achieve long-term impact.

Problem
The rapid rise of fast-food outlets, their marketing and accessibility, including locations next to homes and schools has normalised them in our diets. Commercial determinants of health models recognise the potential for strategic civil society mobilisation as one avenue that can contribute to systemic change. Yet the extent and effective framing of how best to harness community voice in relation to Western Australia’s planning laws to limit fast-food outlets is unknown.

What you did
Two studies were conducted. Study one was a content analysis of six years of WA development assessment panel agendas to identify how many fast-food outlet applications were assessed, how many received community objection, and on what basis objections were made. Study two involved: i) discourse analysis to identify dominant frames of how fast-food outlets and planning decisions are discussed in Australia; ii) in depth interviews with key advocates; and iii) online survey testing of promising message theme effectiveness.

Results
Study one found 81% of proposals with public responses received included objection to new fast-food outlet locations with clear themes for objection evident. These included the impact on amenity, traffic, and character of the area, as well as the contradiction between our health aspirations and growth of fast-food outlets, particularly near schools. Study two identified effective messaging frames to increase support for better planning for fast-food outlets location and approvals, as well as frames that should be avoided. Findings were used to create a message guide.

Lessons
Both studies uncovered the undemocratic way in which drive-through fast-food outlets are approved and how community voices are ignored. The message guide recommends highlighting the David and Goliath battle communities face when objecting to proposed new fast-food outlets. These findings can be used for ensuring community voice is used effectively as part of advocacy efforts.

Background: Place-based approaches to funding preventive health initiatives are designed to address locational disadvantage and realign local systems to address complex problems. The Healthy Tasmania Five Year Strategic Plan for preventive health is managed by the Tasmanian Department of Health (DoH). In late 2023, the ‘Healthy Together’ grants ($300,000 each) were offered to selected communities to foster collaboration and enable communities to work towards a shared vision for health and wellbeing through a place-based approach. This study evaluated community responsiveness, collaborative engagement, and the role of State and local governments in implementing the grants.
Methods: This study adopted a place-based evaluation framework using qualitative methods, embedded within a developmental evaluation approach (2023 – 2025). Data was collected through grant documentation review, semi-structured interviews with DoH grant administrators and key stakeholders from recipient communities, and observations at community workshops. Thematic analysis was informed by the place-based evaluation framework and focused on the establishment phase.
Results: Five of the six selected communities accepted the grants. Community selection by DoH took 12–18 months and ‘readiness’ was determined through review of population and health data, assessment of community capital, networks and existing funding, and community ‘enthusiasm’. All communities were unsure about why they had been selected, attributing it to ‘luck’, ‘politics’ or ‘need’. Community ‘readiness’ was considered a fluctuating concept by DoH, with only one community self-identifying as ‘ready’. This new place-based, non-competitive approach to grant funding was applied using a continuous learning and improvement approach. Communities expressed some uncertainty about meeting government expectations. DoH initiated a range of supports, including local data and a community of practice, to support communities.
Conclusions: Early findings from the Healthy Together grants indicate potentially valuable new ways of working. Greater clarity about the selection process and grant expectations would alleviate community concerns in the establishment phases.

Despite the overall success of the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP), participation rates among rural and remote communities remain disproportionately low in both Phase 1 (completion of the immunochemical faecal occult blood test [iFOBT]) and Phase 2 (follow-up diagnostic colonoscopy), contributing to delayed diagnoses and poorer health outcomes. This study aimed to move beyond the identification of superficial barriers and enablers by exploring the deeper, existential interplay between environmental contexts, access to the NBCSP and the broader healthcare system. Through an empathetic and consumer-centred enquiry, the research sought to broaden understanding of these challenges and identify actionable, community-led solutions. These insights were considered critical for informing policy and guiding decision-makers in the development of equitable and effective screening strategies for rural and remote populations. A qualitative focus group study was conducted, with analytical rigour ensured through Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) under a critical realist lens to identify superordinate themes from individual and shared lived experiences. Findings revealed four superordinate themes that impeded access to the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program for geographically diverse populations: (1) socio-cultural norms and the stoic disposition commonly observed in rural communities; (2) reliance on rural postal systems for program engagement; (3) the pivotal roles and responsibilities of rural general practitioners; and (4) the personal economic burden associated with accessing colonoscopy services. Pragmatic recommendations were mapped across the NBCSP participant pathway, identifying necessary adaptations and patient navigation supports to enhance equity and Program accessibility. Consumer-generated recommendations focused on system-level support, advocating for models of care that deliver community-based, localised interventions and follow-up colonoscopy closer to home, to mitigate geographic barriers shaped by structural, metro centric pathways within the current NBCSP program design. These findings give rise to several critical implications for policy and practice aimed at improving program uptake across diverse geographic contexts.

Tasmania has one of the highest asthma burdens in Australia, yet prevention initiatives often face uneven community engagement and sustainability challenges. This project, undertaken by the Tasmanian Behavioural Lab in partnership with Asthma Australia, developed and piloted the Asthma Community Readiness Rubrics - a tool designed to assess how ready a community is to engage in and sustain asthma prevention initiatives.

Grounded in the Community Readiness Model and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) Framework, the study engaged service providers and community members across three Tasmanian regions - Burnie, Launceston and Brighton - to explore local awareness, motivation, trust and support structures. Through facilitated dialogues, the project foregrounded community voice and lived experience in defining what readiness means in practice.

Findings reveal that not every community is ready for intervention at the same time or in the same way. Readiness varied across seven locally relevant dimensions - from awareness and motivation to the presence of local champions and organisations in action. Participants consistently highlighted trust, family involvement and locally resonant communication as central to sustaining behaviour change.

By listening before acting, the rubrics will enable policymakers to align investment with community capacity and ensure that prevention is people-centred, equitable and enduring. The model demonstrates how empathy, local connection and shared ownership can move prevention beyond information delivery to meaningful, sustained engagement.

This abstract describes the consultation process undertaken in development of a population data profile for the Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander population living in North-Eastern Melbourne.

Introduction/problem:
The North Eastern Public Health Unit (NEPHU) is one of nine Local Public Health Units (LPHUs) across Victoria, its purpose is to work collaboratively to improve the health and wellbeing through evidence-informed approaches, reflecting the diverse needs across the NEPHU region. In February 2025, NEHPHU released the ‘Population Profile of the NEPHU Catchment Area – General Report 2025’, which provides a single point of access to a wide range of population health data relevant to the NEPHU population. During the development of the general Population Profile, it was determined that there was a need for a dedicated profile with a focus on our Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander population. The dedicated profile enabled the data to be explored allowing for the relatively small numbers when compared to the general population and be supported by narrative that reflects and acknowledges the distinct social, economic and cultural factors that impact health and wellbeing for First Nations peoples.

What we did:
To ensure that the presentation and interpretation of data in the dedicated profile was culturally appropriate and guided by community voice the NEPHU First Nations Engagement Officer supported the development of the profile including facilitating consultations with First Nations representatives from local community organisations and health services. Consultation for the dedicated profile was conducted in waves to allow for flexibility in timing and format. Participation was open to any First Nations person from local organisations or colleagues from local ACCOs and ACCHOs. Recruitment remained open throughout the process and any new potential participants were invited to attend consultations (regardless of participation in earlier consultations) and were provided individual briefing and consultation to enable participation in future consultation sessions.

Consultation occurred following data collection and analysis and informed drafting of the report, including sections of narrative which aimed to summarise key inputs from previous consultation. To ensure a culturally safe and supportive environment for consultation, the creation of safe spaces was prioritised and consultation focused on a strength-based approach to data interpretation. Non-identified NEPHU staff worked closely with our First Nations Engagement Officer to ensure inherent biases were challenged and cultural safety always prioritised. Feedback on the culturally safety of consultation sessions was welcomed, and sessions were adapted throughout the process to reflect feedback; some changes included the use of talking sticks and venue changes to host consultation sessions at local community gathering places.

Results:
Participant engagement in the consultation sessions increased throughout each wave. The number of organisations participating in consultation doubled from wave one to wave three. The implemented feedback about cultural considerations for sessions resulted in participants reporting improved openness, trust and cultural safety during consultation sessions. From engaging in this process participants were more likely to engage in other NEPHU projects and meetings, resulting in sustainable relationships that are lasting past the consultation period and are essential for the other work NEPHU completes.

Lessons:
The development of the dedicated profile was only made possible by a truly collaborative process including engaging participants early in the project, active listening, openness to learn and understand community, respectful and genuine engagement and allowing the project to be an iterative process that could change based on consultation output. These learnings will be the basis for consultations with future stakeholder groups. The impact of this consultation has been to shape the profile so that it is not just a collation of data but is framed to be reflective of community perspectives and context.