Terry Marsh

Parks and physical activity: Why are some parks used more than others?

OBJECTIVE To assess how park characteristics and demographic factors are associated with park use. METHODS We studied a diverse sample of parks in a Southern California metropolitan area in 2006-2008 representing a variety of racial and ethnic communities of different socioeconomic strata. We surveyed 51 park directors, 4257 park users and local residents, and observed 30 parks. We explored relationships among the number of people observed, the number of park programs offered, number of organized activities observed, park size, existence of park advisory board, perceptions of safety, and population density and characteristics. RESULTS The strongest correlates of the number of people using the park were the park size and the number of organized activities observed. Neighborhood population density, neighborhood poverty levels, perceptions of park safety, and the presence of a park advisory board were not associated with park use. CONCLUSION While perceptions of low safety have been considered a barrier to park use, perceptions of high safety do not appear to facilitate park use. Having events at the park, including sports competitions and other attractions, appears to be the strongest correlate of park use and community-level physical activity.

Impact and cost-effectiveness of family Fitness Zones: A natural experiment in urban public parks

We evaluated the impact of outdoor exercise equipment (FZ, Fitness Zones) in 12 parks serving diverse populations. We used the System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) to assess use and estimate energy expenditure prior to and twice after FZ installation. Park use increased more in FZ parks than in 10 control parks that did not get equipment, but the difference was not statistically significant. However, self-reports of being a new park user increased more in FZ parks, and estimated energy expenditure in FZ parks was higher at both follow-ups than at baseline. Installing Fitness Zones appears to be cost-effective (10.5 cents/MET increase) and most successful in parks in densely populated areas with limited facilities. Longer-term follow-up measures are needed to determine if the early increases in physical activity associated with the Fitness Zone installations are sustained.

New Recreational Facilities for the Young and the Old in Los Angeles: Policy and Programming Implications

It is assumed that higher quality recreation facilities promote physical activity and serve communities better. We tested this assumption by comparing changes in the use of an expanded and renovated skate park (a facility for skateboarding) and a modernized senior citizens center to two similar facilities that were not refurbished. The skate park was nearly tripled in size, and the senior center was remodeled and received new exercise equipment, a courtyard garden, and modern architectural features. We assessed use of these facilities through direct observation and surveyed both facility users and residents living within 2 miles of each facility. We found that making improvements to facilities alone will not always guarantee increased use. Although there was a 510% increase in use of the expanded skate park compared to a 77% increase in the comparison skate park, the senior center had substantially fewer users and provided fewer hours of exercise classes and other programmed activities after the facility was renovated. The implication of our study is that use results from a complex equation that includes not only higher quality recreation facilities but also progamming, staffing, fees, hours of operation, marketing, outreach, and perhaps a host of other human factors.

Neighborhood Poverty, Park Use, and Park-Based Physical Activity in a Southern California City

A rich literature indicates that individuals of lower socio-economic status engage in less leisure time physical activity than individuals of higher socio-economic status. However, the source of the difference is believed to be, in part, due to differential access to resources that support physical activity. However, it has not been shown as to whether equal access to parks can mitigate differences in leisure time physical activity. Using systematic direct observation, we quantified physical activity in neighborhood parks in a large Southern California city located in areas with high, medium, and a low percentage of households in poverty. We documented how neighborhood parks are managed and programmed and also interviewed both a sample of park users and a random sample of households within a mile radius of the parks. We found that parks are used less in high-poverty areas compared to medium- and low-poverty area parks, even after accounting for differences in size, staffing, and programming. The strongest correlates of park use were the number of part time staff, the number of supervised and organized programs, and knowing the park staff. Perceptions of safety were not relevant to park use among those interviewed in the park, however it had a small relationship with reported frequency of park use among local residents. Among park users, time spent watching electronic media was negatively correlated with the frequency of visiting the park. Future research should test whether increasing park staffing and programming will lead to increased park use in high-poverty neighborhoods.

Physical activity in parks: A randomized controlled trial using community engagement.

BACKGROUND Physical inactivity is an important health risk factor that could be addressed at the community level. PURPOSE The goal of the study was to determine whether using a community-based participatory approach with park directors and park advisory boards (PABs) could increase physical activity in local parks. Whether involving PABs would be more effective than working with park directors alone was also tested. DESIGN An RCT intervention from October 2007 to April 2012 was used, with partial blinding of observers to the condition. All data were analyzed in 2012. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS Of 183 eligible parks in the City of Los Angeles, 50 neighborhood park/recreation centers serving diverse populations participated. Parks were randomized to three study arms: (1) park-director intervention (PD-only); (2) PAB intervention (PAB/PD); and (3) a control arm. Physical activity in each park was systematically observed, and park users and residents living within 1 mile of the park were interviewed. INTERVENTION(S) The intervention included assessing park use, obtaining feedback from park users and community residents, training on outreach and marketing, and giving each intervention park

Impact of Park Renovations on Park Use and Park-based Physical Activity

4000 to increase park-based physical activity. The PAB/PD arm required participation and concurrence on all purchases by the PAB. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Change in the number of park users and change in the level of park-based physical activity, expressed as MET-hours. RESULTS Relative to control parks where physical activity declined, in both the PD-only and PAB/PD parks, physical activity increased, generating an estimated average of 600 more visits/week/park, and 1830 more MET-hours of physical activity/week/park. Both residents and park users in the intervention arms in the intervention arms reported increased frequency of exercise. No differences were noted between the PD-only and PAB/PD study arms. CONCLUSIONS Providing park directors and PABs with training on outreach and marketing, feedback on park users, and modest funds increased the amount of physical activity observed in parks.

The First National Study of Neighborhood Parks

BACKGROUND Given the concerns about low rates of physical activity among low-income minority youth, many community-based organizations are investing in the creation or renovation of public parks to encourage youth to become more physically active. To what degree park renovations accomplish this goal is not known. METHODS We used the System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) to measure park users and their physical activity levels before and after 2 parks were renovated. We compared findings with 4 parks: 2 that were unrenovated parks and 2 that were undergoing renovation. We also surveyed park users and local residents about their use of the parks. RESULTS Compared with parks that had not yet been renovated, the improved parks saw more than a doubling in the number of visitors and a substantial increase in energy expended in the parks. Increased park use was pronounced in adults and children, but was not seen in teens and seniors. Park renovations were associated with a significantly increased perception of park safety. CONCLUSIONS Park improvements can have a significant impact on increasing park use and local physical activity.

The Potential for Pocket Parks to Increase Physical Activity

INTRODUCTION An extensive infrastructure of neighborhood parks supports leisure time physical activity in most U.S. cities; yet, most Americans do not meet national guidelines for physical activity. Neighborhood parks have never been assessed nationally to identify their role in physical activity. METHODS Using a stratified multistage sampling strategy, a representative sample of 174 neighborhood parks in 25 major cities (population >100,000) across the U.S. was selected. Park use, park-based physical activity, and park conditions were observed during a typical week using systematic direct observation during spring/summer of 2014. Park administrators were interviewed to assess policies and practices. Data were analyzed in 2014-2015 using repeated-measure negative binomial regressions to estimate weekly park use and park-based physical activity. RESULTS Nationwide, the average neighborhood park of 8.8 acres averaged 20 users/hour or an estimated 1,533 person hours of weekly use. Walking loops and gymnasia each generated 221 hours/week of moderate to vigorous physical activity. Seniors represented 4% of park users, but 20% of the general population. Parks were used less in low-income than in high-income neighborhoods, largely explained by fewer supervised activities and marketing/outreach efforts. Programming and marketing were associated with 37% and 63% more hours of moderate to vigorous physical activity/week in parks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The findings establish national benchmarks for park use, which can guide future park investments and management practices to improve population health. Offering more programming, using marketing tools like banners and posters, and installing facilities like walking loops, may help currently underutilized parks increase population physical activity.

Involving community stakeholders to increase park use and physical activity.

Purpose. To assess the use of new pocket parks in low-income neighborhoods. Design. The design of the study was a quasi-experimental post-test only comparison. Setting. Los Angeles, California, was the setting for the study. Subjects. Subjects were park users and residents living within .5 mile of three pocket parks and 15 neighborhood parks. Intervention. The creation of pocket parks. Measures. We used the System of Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) tool to measure park use and park-based physical activity, and then surveyed park users and residents about their park use. Analysis. We surveyed 392 and 432 household members within .5 mile of the three pocket parks before and after park construction, respectively, as well as 71 pocket park users, and compared them to 992 neighborhood park users and 342 residents living within .5 mile of other neighborhood parks. We compared pocket park use to playground area use in the larger neighborhood parks. We used descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations for the analysis. Results. Overall, pocket park use compared favorably in promoting moderate-to-vigorous physical activity with that of existing playground space in nearby parks, and they were cost-effective at

The Paradox of Parks in Low-Income Areas Park Use and Perceived Threats

0.73/MET hour (metabolic equivalent hour) gained. Pocket park visitors walked an average of .25 miles to get to a park. Conclusions. Pocket parks, when perceived as attractive and safe destinations, may increase physical activity by encouraging families with children to walk there. Additional strategies and programs may be needed to encourage more residents to use these parks.