171 - Leveraging Community Health Needs Assessments for Park Equity: A Mixed-Methods Study

Publication Number: 171.5898

Pooja S. Tandon, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States; Bryce P. Takenaka, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, United States; Howard Frumkin, University of Washington School of Public Health, Bainbridge Island, WA, United States

Background: Parks and greenspace have well-documented health benefits, especially for children, and should be considered public health interventions. Given that nonprofit hospitals must conduct regular community health needs assessments (CHNAs) and invest in social determinants of health, there is considerable opportunity to understand and elevate this alignment of health care, public health and parks organizations to promote health and health equity.

Objective: 1) To examine how health care organizations are reporting on parks and greenspace indicators in their CHNAs and 2) Explore opportunities for cross-sector collaborations between the health and park sectors to promote park and health equity

Design/Methods: We reviewed and extracted park and greenspace outcomes (access, utilization, equity, investment, and connectedness) from CHNAs (n=50) from the largest non-profit hospitals within the cities that were scored in the lower 50th percentile of the Trust for Public Land’s 2024 ParkScore Index. Largest hospitals were measured by the number of staffed beds reported by the American Hospital Directory. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives from hospitals/health care (n=8), parks (n=17), and community organizations (n=4), who were recruited using purposive and convenience sampling. Open-ended coding informed the thematic analyses for our interviews.

Results: Approximately half (52.9%) of the CHNAs reported any mentioning of parks and greenspaces as a community need, and 54.9% measured parks and greenspaces in the data collection process. 86% of CHNAs reported mental health as a community health priority, following access to care (61%) and chronic diseases (42%). Measures of ‘access’ and ‘utilization’ were the most reported across all park and greenspace measures. Key themes that emerged from our interviews and focus groups involved: 1) parks and greenspaces were identified as important community resources, 2) CHNAs were recognized as potentially beneficial supporting park and greenspace programming, 3) historical impact of structural racism on parks and health influences existing inequities, and 4) existing and formulating community partnerships were challenged by limits in available funding.

Conclusion(s): CHNAs could be used more effectively as tools to routinely examine community park and greenspace needs, especially to promote child and adolescent health and well-being. Our findings also suggest that there are opportunities for cross-sector collaboration between health institutions, park agencies, and community groups to advance health equity.