Objective: The purpose of the Be Red Cross Ready Community Outreach Project (BRCR) was to train health education students to provide high-quality, theory-driven community preparedness education in a community on the U.S.-Mexico border. This aim was achieved through an innovative partnership between a community organization, a federal research center, and a university. The ultimate goal of the project was to increase disaster and emergency preparation to protect, promote, and preserve the health of the public

Lieberman, Lisa D

English

Objective: To monitor the progress in the promotion of walkable community initiatives

Montclair State University Digital Commons

Montclair State University Montclair State University Digital Commons Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works Department of Public Health Summer 6-2010 Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education Lisa D. Lieberman Montclair State University, liebermanl@montclair.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/public-health-facpubs  Part of the Clinical Epidemiology Commons, Community Health and Preventive Medicine Commons, Environmental Public Health Commons, Epidemiology Commons, Health and Medical Physics Commons, Health Services Administration Commons, Health Services Research Commons, International Public Health Commons, Medical Education Commons, Other Public Health Commons, Patient Safety Commons, and the Public Health Education and Promotion Commons MSU Digital Commons Citation Lieberman, Lisa D., "Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education" (2010). Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works. 170. https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/public-health-facpubs/170 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Public Health at Montclair State University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works by an authorized administrator of Montclair State University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@montclair.edu. 313Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 37(3): 313-317 (June 2010)DOI: 10.1177/1090198110367610© 2010 by SOPHEObjectiveTo monitor the progress in the promotion of walkable community initiatives.Assessment of NeedsThe surveillance of pedestrian activity levels is essential in monitoring progress toward national and state goals to decrease obesity and overweight. Recommenda-tions are that children accumulate 1 hour of physical activity daily, and adults a mini-mum of 2½ hours per week (U.S. Depart-ment of Health and Human Services, 2008). The Centers for Disease Control and Pre-vention (CDC) has determined that improv-ing and creating environments that promote activity can result in a 25% increase in the percentage of people exercising at least three times a week. (CDC, 2005). People living in neighborhoods with a mix of shops and businesses within easy walking distance have a 35% lower risk of obesity (Powell, Martin, & Chowdhury, 2003). The Task Force on Community Preventive Services strongly recommends the creation of enhanced access to places for physical activity combined with informational out-reach (CDC, 2005). Public health practi-tioners are asked to measure outcomes of working with communities to increase pedestrian activity with little resource allo-cation to evaluation.Program StrategyA comprehensive plan involving envi-ronmental changes and health promotion was developed to create a walkable com-munity in the city of Erlanger, Kentucky. This project, initially a collaborative effort between the city and the Northern Kentucky Health Department (NKHD), led to the Practice Notes: Strategies in Health EducationThe Practice Notes section is intended to keep readers informed about health education practice around the country. It is an attempt to spread the word about exemplary strate-gies, initiatives, and programs and share successes in overcoming obstacles or challenges. Periodically, articles presenting perspectives on practice-related issues are also included in Practice Notes.Program: Usage of a Pedestrian Count Tool to Measure Environmental and Health Promotion EffortsSponsors: The Northern Kentucky Health Department, the City of Erlanger, Kentucky, and Step Forward Erlanger Community Coalition314   Health Education & Behavior (June 2010)creation of a Master Sidewalk Plan for the city of Erlanger, a community coalition, and implementation of health promotion programs that promote walking and biking. The NKHD assisted the city in finding and applying for funds for the Master Sidewalk Plan. Thus far, grant awards plus city con-tributions total $1,078,821.00.The National Documentation Project (NDP) survey tool is being used to measure change in pedestrian and bike counts over a 5-year period during which both envi-ronmental changes (sidewalks, crosswalks, signage, etc.) and health promotion pro-gramming will be initiated.Evaluation ApproachThe NDP annual bicycle and pedestrian count and survey is sponsored by the Insti-tute of Transportation Engineers Pedestrian and Bicycle Council. NDP was initiated by Alta Planning and Design, a national bicycle and pedestrian planning firm. At the time of initiation, there was no consistent count-ing or surveying methodology (Alta Plan-ning and Design, 2008). The NKHD adopted the NDP tool to evaluate whether walkabil-ity efforts were working in Erlanger. Data were collected using trained community volunteers. The volunteers count bikes, pedestrians, and other modes of nonmotor-ized transportation during the official pedes-trian count week (2nd week of September). Additional baseline data were gathered in May 2007 before construction or beginning walking education programs. Raw data are submitted to the national center and data are used internally.Implications for PractitionersThe tool is simple to use and economi-cal, and community volunteers can be easily trained. It does have limitations: counts are affected by weather; Alta-Planning has not yet put the entry system online, therefore requiring faxing; and although Alta Plan-ning is housing the data, there is no report-ing tool for comparison between local and national data. The ease of use and economy of the tool, however, outweighs these prob-lems. Changes in the transportation system (roads, sidewalks, trails) are made by peo-ple elected or appointed to make such deci-sions. Officials are accountable to the taxpayers in their communities. The NDP survey tool provides an economical way for public health, planning professionals, and elected officials to report on the prog-ress of the investment in infrastructures that promote walking. It provides a cost-effec-tive and sustainable strategy tool for evalu-ation of walkable community initiatives.For more information, contact Steve Katkowsky, Public Health Director, or Mary Singler, Health Promotion Manager, 610 Medical Village Drive, Edgewood, KY 41017; phone (859) 341-4264; e-mail: steve.katkowsky@ky.gov or mary.singler@ky.gov; website: www.nkyhealth.org.ReferencesAlta Planning and Design. (2008). Alta presenta-tions and studies—National bicycle and pedestrian documentation project. Retrieved from http://www.altaplanning.com/presentations+_+studies.aspxCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005). Creating or improving access to places for physical activity. Retrieved from http://www.thecommunityguide.org/pa/pa-int-create-access.pdfPowell, K., Martin, L., & Chowdhury, P. (2003). Places to walk: Convenience and regular physical activity. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1519-1521.Task Force on Community Preventive Services. (2002). Recommendations to increase physical activity in communities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 22(4S), 67-72.U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. Retrieved from http://www.health .gov/paguidelines/guidelines/default.aspxPractice Notes   315Program: Put It Out Rockland: A Tailored Approach to Smoking CessationSponsors: Rockland County Department of Health, Division of Health PromotionObjectivesThe Put It Out Rockland (PIOR) cessa-tion program is part of a comprehensive tobacco prevention, education, and cessa-tion program within the Rockland County Department of Health. At the onset of the program, the goal was to achieve an adult smoking rate of 12% by 2010, consistent with Healthy People 2010. The primary objective of PIOR is to provide direct ces-sation services and resources, including free nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs), to the residents of Rockland County, with a special emphasis on the underserved.Assessment of NeedsRockland County is geographically the smallest and one of the most ethnically and economically diverse counties in New York State. On program initiation in 2003, adult smoking rates in Rockland County were slightly more than 15%, lower than those for the U.S. as a whole or New York State, but not meeting the Healthy People 2010 objective (Lieberman, 2008).Program StrategyIn 2003, Master Settlement Agreement funds were used to develop a comprehensive tobacco prevention, education, and cessa-tion program. Two individuals were hired and trained as tobacco treatment specialists. After reviewing best practices and other successful program models, an 8-week, 10-session group behavior modification program using nicotine replacement thera-pies (patch, gum, and lozenge) was devel-oped. The first two sessions of the program occur before the quit date to allow for quit preparation. Program participants receive handouts and educational materials specific to the content of each session.Best practice at the time of program development suggested that an 8-week course of NRT was effective and that the combination of behavior modification and NRT yielded a higher quit rate than either one alone (Fiore et al., 2000). Early on in the program, it was noted that an addi-tional 2 weeks of NRT (for a total of up to 10 weeks of treatment) increased pro-gram success in those who experienced difficulty as determined during midprogram evaluations. In addition, the Put It Out Rock-land program developed a unique, tailored dosing approach that includes double dos-ing (patch with gum or lozenge) for clients smoking more than 25 cigarettes per day with a high Fagerstrom score.Evaluation ApproachSince 2003, an independent, external consultant has completed a continuous and ongoing evaluation of the program. A pre- and posttest survey and 3-, 6-, and 12-month telephone follow-ups are used to calculate cessation rates for program completers. Extensive process evaluation has provided feedback to improve program implementa-tion and delivery. In 6 years, more than 1,257 smokers have participated in PIOR, with 919 (74%) completing the program.316   Health Education & Behavior (June 2010)Implications for PractitionersEvaluation is often the overlooked and undervalued component of public health practice. In this project, evaluation data were especially important in determining the most successful cessation method. Qualitative feedback was used to expand and modify the program. PIOR began as an 8-week group program. Some participants expressed a need for ongoing support after program completion, others described a desire for an individual program rather than a group, and other members had difficulty making all group sessions. Subsequently, a one-on-one version of the program was developed that includes at least three 30-minute sessions with a cessation special-ist spread out over 6 weeks. It was also noted that non–English-speaking individuals preferred the one-on-one method. There-fore, translators are now available for ses-sions in Creole/French, Spanish, and Russian, the predominant languages spoken by residents in Rockland County. Over the years, the PIOR program has developed an extensive network of partner organizations, including schools, work sites, and other community-based organizations and coali-tions that increase community awareness, referrals, and program promotion. Outreach workers have been essential in reaching the underserved and non–English-speaking population. Both observational feedback and formal evaluation data have been useful in the development of this “model practice” program as designated by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) in 2004.For more information, contact Una Dif-fley, MPH, Assistant Director, Public Health Education, e-mail: diffleyu@co.rockland.ny.us; Melanie Shefchik, Health Educator, e-mail: shefchim@co.rockland.ny.us; Mary-anne Ferrara, Program Specialist, e-mail: ferraram@co.rockland.ny.us; Shelley Chan-ler, Program Coordinator, e-mail: chanlers@co.rockland.ny.us; Sandy King, Director of Health Promotion, 50 Sanatorium Rd, Building J, Pomona, NY 10970, phone: 845-364-2501, e-mail: kings@co.rockland.ny.us; Lisa Lieberman, Evaluator, Montclair State University, 4203 University Hall, Montclair, NJ 07043, phone: 973-655-5179, e-mail: liebermanl@mail .montclair.edu.ReferencesFiore, M. C., Bailey, W. C., Cohen, S. J., Dorfman, S. F., Goldstein, M. G., Gritz, E. R., . . . Wewers, M. E. (2000). Treating tobacco use and dependence: Clinical Practice Guidelines. Rockville, MD: U.S. Depart-ment of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service.Lieberman, L. (2008). Put It Out Rockland: The Rockland County Department of Health Comprehensive Tobacco Prevention Educa-tion and Control Initiative, final report, 2001-2008. Pomona, NY: Rockland County Department of Health.Practice Notes   317PRACTICE NOTES EDITORIAL COMMITTEELisa D. Lieberman, PhD, CHES, Department of Health and Nutrition Sciences, Montclair State University, New Jersey.SUBMISSION INFORMATIONAbstracts for Practice Notes and all correspondence concerning abstract review should be sent to Lisa D. Lieberman, Department of Health and Nutrition Sciences, Montclair State University, liebermanl@mail.montclair.edu. Submissions, formatted in Word, can be sent by e-mail attachment to liebermanl@mail.montclair.edu. Published manuscript length is approximately 300 words (excluding headings and contact information). Sub-mitted manuscripts may be up to 700 words and will be edited for length and clarity. Include the following: name of initiative or program, contact person, sponsoring agency or agencies, address, and phone number. The program description should include the following headings: Objective, Assessment of Needs, Program Strategy (e.g., risk reduc-tion, community organizing, media advocacy, disease management, policy advocacy, coalition building, social support, etc.), Evaluation Approach, and Implications for Practitioners (including descriptions of any special challenges or unique circumstances that the project has overcome). Authors should not include evaluation results because Practice Notes is intended to describe processes and programs, not to assess outcomes. Submissions will be judged on applicability and utility to the health education practitioner, clarity of objectives, innovativeness and creativity, existence of evaluation plan, and potential replicability. Additional artwork, graphs, or tables may be submitted in camera-ready form.

Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education

Montclair State University Montclair State University Digital Commons Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works Department of Public Health Spring 4-2010 Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education Lisa D. Lieberman Montclair State University, liebermanl@montclair.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/public-health-facpubs  Part of the Clinical Epidemiology Commons, Community Health and Preventive Medicine Commons, Emergency Medicine Commons, Environmental Public Health Commons, Epidemiology Commons, Health Services Administration Commons, Health Services Research Commons, International Public Health Commons, Medical Education Commons, Mental and Social Health Commons, Other Medicine and Health Sciences Commons, Other Public Health Commons, Patient Safety Commons, and the Public Health Education and Promotion Commons MSU Digital Commons Citation Lieberman, Lisa D., "Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education" (2010). Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works. 160. https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/public-health-facpubs/160 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Public Health at Montclair State University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Department of Public Health Scholarship and Creative Works by an authorized administrator of Montclair State University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@montclair.edu. 165Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 37(2): 165-169 (April 2010)DOI: 10.1177/1090198110363385© 2010 by SOPHEPractice Notes: Strategies in Health EducationThe Practice Notes section is intended to keep readers informed about health educa-tion practice around the country. It is an attempt to spread the word about exemplary strategies, initiatives, and programs and share successes in overcoming obstacles or challenges. Periodically, articles presenting perspectives on practice-related issues are also included in Practice Notes.Program: Be Red Cross Ready: Community Preparedness Through Innovative PartnershipsSponsor: American Red Cross El Paso Area Chapter, University of Texas at El Paso, and Hispanic Health Disparities Research CenterObjectiveThe purpose of the Be Red Cross Ready Community Outreach Project (BRCR) was to train health education stu-dents to provide high-quality, theory-driven community preparedness education in a community on the U.S.–Mexico border. This aim was achieved through an innova-tive partnership between a community organization, federal research center, and university. The ultimate goal of the project was to increase disaster and emergency preparation to protect, promote, and pre-serve the health of the public.Assessment of NeedsThe terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the devastation of Hurricane Katrina highlighted the complete lack of emergency and disaster preparedness (also known as community preparedness) plan-ning and education in the United States and dictated the need for such prepared-ness. A previous study found that most participants were aware of the need to become prepared but were unsure of how to begin the process. In addition, partici-pants agreed that the general public needed additional emergency information and edu-cation that should be provided by a trusted and prepared source (Chesser et al., 2006).The American Red Cross reported that only 1% of El Pasoans would be prepared should a manmade or natural disaster strike, compared with 7% of Americans. El Paso is not impervious to emergency situations. Fires, flooding, and other situations requir-ing first aid and CPR are common occur-rences in El Paso, and the community is strikingly underprepared for such emergent situations. Proper preparation can minimize the effect of such events and save lives.166   Health Education & Behavior (April 2010)There is an urgent need to disseminate culturally appropriate information regard-ing feasible preparedness actions among minority communities (Messias & Lacy, 2007). The ability to disseminate informa-tion to diverse priority populations is a criti-cal skill for health educators. Incorporating Hispanic cultural assets such as familism into health education programs may facil-itate both community preparedness and stu-dent competency and confidence in a region that is predominantly Hispanic (primarily Mexican American).Program StrategyThe American Red Cross El Paso Area Chapter (ARC) partnered with the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) and the His-panic Health Disparities Research Center to plan, implement, and evaluate the proj-ect. Specifically, the goal of the BRCR was to increase access to no-cost, high-quality community preparedness education.The students completed the ARC com-munity preparedness education and instruc-tor training certification, and they modi fied the ARC curriculum to incorporate cultur-ally relevant and theory-driven concepts and constructs. The educational interven-tion was provided to approximately 300 UTEP students, faculty, and staff. The UTEP community was selected as the pri-ority population for this project because it is one of the largest employers in El Paso. Participants acquired information and gai-ned skills to be better prepared in the event of an emergency situation.Evaluation ApproachThe approach to evaluation was two-fold. The participants in the BRCR pro-gram and the student educators were both evaluated. The participants who received the preparedness education completed a questionnaire before and after interven-tion that was grounded in the constructs of the Health Belief Model to determine the effects of the intervention on perceived susceptibility to and seriousness of emer-gency situations, perceived benefits and barriers to emergency preparedness, and preparedness self-efficacy.The students were administered a ques-tionnaire that consists of a demographic profile and the Self Assessment for Health Educators–Perceived Competence from the National Commission on Health Edu-cation Credentialing (2007) prior to and after participation in the disaster prepared-ness community outreach project to deter-mine if perceived competence in the seven areas of responsibility for health educators increased as a result of planning, implement-ing, and evaluating the BRCR program.Implications for PractitionersThrough this partnership, the ARC pro-vided community preparedness education to a large group of El Pasoans and adv-anced their organizational mission. In add-ition, the ARC trained a new cohort of vol unteers. Ideally, the students’ sense of service to their community will be enh anced as a result of participation, and this service will continue upon completion of the proj-ect to further diffuse the mission of the ARC and improve the health of the community.A new cohort of health educators rec-eived valuable, practical experience. Planning, implementing, and evaluating the BRCR program improved students’ knowledge, skills, and perceived competence as pub-lic health educators. The students honed their health education skills and provided effective theory-driven education in a cul-turally appropriate and sensitive manner. They also analyzed data and reported their results to the community partners, build-ing confidence and strengthening relation-ships. These future practitioners will enter the workforce with more experience to adv-ance the mission of the health education profession.Practice Notes   167For more information, contact Sharon Thompson, MPH, PhD, Associate Professor, University of Texas at El Paso, Department of Health Promotion, 1101 North Camp-bell Street, El Paso, TX 79902; phone: (915) 747-7221 or (915) 747-7207; e-mail: sthompson@utep.edu; or Holly Mata, MS, LSC, Graduate Research Associate, University of Texas at El Paso, College of Health Sciences, Interdisciplinary Health Sciences PhD Program, 1101 N. Campbell, Box 714B, El Paso, TX 79902-0581; phone: (575) 551-1458; e-mail: hjdempsey@ miners.utep.edu.Authors’ NoteThis was funded by the National Ins-titutes of Health, National Center on Min-ority Health and Health Disparities (Grants P20 MD 000548 and P20 000548). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center on Minority Health Disparities or the National Institutes of Health. This was a joint ven-ture of the University of Texas at El Paso and the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health.ReferencesChesser, A., Ablah, E., Hawley, S. R., Wolfe, D., St. Romain, T., Grube, C. D., & Molgaard, C. A. (2006). Preparedness needs assessment in a rural state: Themes derived from public focus groups. Bio-security and Bio terrorism: Biodefense, Strategy, Pra ctice, and Science, 4, 374-383.Messias, D. K. H., & Lacy, E. (2007). Katrina-related health concerns of Latino survivors and evacuees. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 18, 443-464.National Commission on Health Education Credentialing. (2007). The health educa-tion specialist: A study guide for profes-sional competence (5th ed.). Whitehall, PA: Author.Program: JointUse.org, a Website to Promote the Shared Use of School and Community Spaces to Keep People Active and HealthySponsors: Prevention Institute, Berkeley Media Studies GroupObjectiveWe developed the website www .jointuse.org to create visibility for a pub-lic health strategy called joint use, which allows schools and communities to share spaces like gymnasiums, athletic fields, and swimming pools to facilitate physical activity. The site brings together the work of California’s foremost joint use experts and houses it all in one place, making it easier for public health advocates to find the resources they need to build momen-tum for joint use projects. Whereas the site focuses primarily on California, many of the resources apply nationwide.Assessment of NeedsThe research is clear: Physical activity is a strong determinant of health, but most Americans don’t get enough to be healthy. About 60% of U.S. adults do not get the recommended amount of physical activity. Twenty-five percent are physically inactive (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1996), and inactivity-related health problems such as Type 2 diabetes and heart disease are on the rise in the United States, often with fatal conseque nces. Approximately 250,000 deaths a year in the United States can be attributed to physical inactivity (Booth, Gordon, Carlson, & Hamilton, 2000).168   Health Education & Behavior (April 2010)Many Americans don’t get enough exe-rcise simply because they don’t have pla-ces to be active. This is particularly true for low-income communities and com-munities of color, which typically have less park space and are less likely to have houses with private backyards (Sister, Wilson, & Wolch, 2007).Research shows that people who have parks nearby exercise 38% more than do those who do not have easy access (Kerr, 2008). Using joint use partnerships to open schoolyards after hours is one way to dec-rease disparities in open space and create environments where kids and adults can be active. For years, members of California’s joint use task force, representing more than a dozen organizations across the state, have been working to encourage the creation of more joint use partnerships. The problem was that until recently they had no effi-cient way to communicate, pool their res-ources, or work together as a group.Program StrategyThe June 2009 launch of jointuse.org was designed to address the need to link available physical activity spaces to potential users. The site has solidified the efforts of the California Joint Use Task Force and become a communications hub for advocates, school and public officials, and others who are interested in joint use.The task force’s combined resources allow site visitors to view Photovoice (Wang & Burris, 1997) projects done by young peo ple showing what systemic conditions are making it hard for them to be active, watch videos of successful joint use projects in action, find the loca-tions of joint use partnerships in California, download sample joint use agreements, join a discussion forum to interact with task force members, and get tips on jumpstarting a joint use partner-ship in their own community.The site proactively frames joint use as a health issue. Videos focus on solutions while illustrating the community benefits of joint use and physical activity, such as improved academic performance and com- munity cohesion. Jointuse.org puts what can be intimidating policy language in the context of fun, possibility, and a can-do spirit.Evaluation ApproachThe site administrator tracks various web metrics including number of visitors and average time on the site to see who is using the site, how often, and in what ways. The administrator also monitors the number of users registered to use the dis-cussion board and how many people have subscribed to the jointuse.org newsletter. A feedback inbox allows visitors to sub-mit questions, comments, and suggestions for improvements. Visitors can also sub-mit details about their community’s joint use partnership for inclusion on an inter-active map.Implications for PractitionersJoint use partnerships improve peo-ple’s chances of being healthy by making it easier for them to be physically active. Jointuse.org creates awareness about these partnerships and, unlike many web-sites, places the issue itself—rather than individual organizations—front and cen-ter. Informal assessments from users indi-cate they appreciate that approach. The website’s structure and main features would be easy to replicate for nearly any public health issue.For more information, contact Manal Aboelata, Prevention Institute, PO Box 8480, LA, CA 90008; phone: (323) 296-5750; e-mail: manal@preventioninstitute.org; or Heather Gelert, Online Communica-tions Specialist, Berkeley Media Studies Practice Notes   169Groups, 2140 Shattuck Ave, suite 804, Berkeley, CA 94704; phone 510-204-9700; e-mail: Gehlert@bmsg.org.ReferencesBooth, F. W., Gordon, S. E., Carlson, C. J., & Hamilton, M. T. (2000). Waging war on modern chronic diseases: primary preven-tion through exercise biology. Journal of Applied Physiology, 88, 774-787.Kerr. J. (2008). Designing for active living among adults. San Diego, CA: Active Living Research, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Retrieved May 21, 2009, from http://www.activelivingresearch.org/files/Active_Adults.pdfCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. (1996). A report of the Surgeon General: Physical activity and health. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved May 21, 2009, http://www.cdc.gov/NCCDPHP/sgr/pdf/sgraag.pdfSister, C., Wilson, J., & Wolch, J. (2007). The Green Visions plan for 21st century south-ern California: Park congestion and strat-egies to increase park equity. Los Angeles: University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory and Center for Sus tainable Cities. Retrieved May 21, 2009, http://www.greenvisionsplan.net/html/documents/15_green_visions_park_congestion_and_strategies_to_increase_park_equity.pdfWang, C., & Burris, M. (1997). PhotoVoice: Concept, methodology, and use for partici-patory needs assessment. Health Education and Behavior, 24, 369-387.PRACTICE NOTES EDITORIAL COMMITTEELisa D. Lieberman, PhD, CHES, Department of Health and Nutrition Sciences, Montclair State University, New Jersey.SUBMISSION INFORMATIONAbstracts for Practice Notes and all correspondence concerning abstract review should be sent to Lisa D. Lieberman, Department of Health and Nutrition Sciences, Montclair State University, liebermanl@mail.montclair.edu. Submissions, formatted in Word, can be sent by e-mail attachment to liebermanl@mail.montclair.edu. Published manuscript length is approximately 300 words (excluding headings and contact infor-mation). Submitted manuscripts may be up to 700 words and will be edited for length and clarity. Include the following: name of initiative or program, contact person, spon-soring agency or agencies, address, and phone number. The program description should include the following headings: Objective, Assessment of Needs, Program Strategy (e.g., risk reduction, community organizing, media advocacy, disease man-agement, policy advocacy, coalition building, social support, etc.), Evaluation Approach, and Implications for Practitioners (including descriptions of any special challenges or unique circumstances that the project has overcome). Authors should not include evaluation results because Practice Notes is intended to describe processes and programs, not to assess outcomes. Submissions will be judged on applicability and utility to the health education practitioner, clarity of objectives, innovativeness and crea-tivity, existence of evaluation plan, and potential replicability. Additional artwork, graphs, or tables may be submitted in camera-ready form.

https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1149&context=public-health-facpubs

Practice Notes: Strategies in Health Education

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Montclair State University Digital Commons

Montclair State University Digital Commons