dual demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and clustering at the district level.
- Results. Results showed small associations between more specific JUPs and increased PA (IRR 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.02). Closer examination of specific JUP provisions indicates that specifying what times facilities are available for use was associated with vigorous exercise and prioritizing school or affiliated organizations' use and which spaces were available for use were associated with vigorous exercise and more frequent PA participation, which includes participation in sports or athletics. No associations were found between more specific JUPs and SB.
- Conclusions. JUPS may have small influences on adolescent physical activity behavior. Future longitudinal studies should be conducted to examine the impact of JUPs in conjunction with other physical activity-related policies and environmental changes to determine what impact they have on overall adolescent physical activity and sedentary behavior.
Slater S, Chriqui J, Chaloupka FJ, Johnston L. Joint use policies: Are they related to adolescent behavior? Prev. Med 2014 Dec; 69S:S37-S43.
- Defining healthy schools remains largely discipline specific. Design disciplines ground discussions in a “green building” framework. Public health approaches healthy schools through programmatic interventions for physical activity and nutrition.
- This article presents a more systemic approach to healthy schools via health impact assessment (HIA). It reviews literature on health determinants in school environments, focusing on physical design. Existing school HIAs are reviewed with other decision support tools that provide guidance on the operation and design of healthy schools.
- The paper examines current use of HIAs in schools and develops a screening matrix for using HIA in creating healthy schools.
Arthi Rao, Catherine L. Ross. Health Impact Assessments and Healthy Schools. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2014;34(2):141-152.
- Despite the growing interest in expanding the joint use of K–12 public schools by public health and planning practitioners to promote healthy, sustainable communities, the topic has received little attention in the urban planning and public health scholarship.
- The objective of this article is to situate joint use in the academic literature focused on the links between built environments and health.
- The author examines the “state of the field” of K–12 joint use through studying the academic and associated literature, interviews, participant observation, and case examples and develops a joint use classification system to aid researchers and practitioners.
Vincent J. Joint Use of Public Schools: A Framework for Promoting Healthy Communities. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2014;34(2):153-168.
- In 2005, the United States Congress directed the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to develop the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program (NTPP).
- The program provided over $25 million in contract authority to four pilot communities (Columbia, Missouri; Marin County, California; Minneapolis area, Minnesota; and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin) for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and nonmotorized programs.
- This report summarizes the progress and results of the NTPP from August 2005 through December 2013, updating and expanding upon the analysis from the Report to the U.S. Congress on the Outcomes of the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program, submitted by the Federal Highway Administration in April 2012.
- This report analyzes the results through December 2013 of the NTPP in terms of program implementation, transportation mode shift toward walking and bicycling and associated improvements pertaining to access and mobility, safety and public health, and the environment and energy.
- From 2007 to 2013, the pilot communities observed an estimated 22.8 percent increase in the number of walking trips and an estimated 48.3 percent increase in the number of bicycling trips.
- This report examines how the NTPP pilot communities provide examples to othe