Physical Activity and Health Partnerships among Park and Recreation Departments in North Carolina

1. Physical Activity and Health Partnerships among Park and Recreation Departments in North Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation, & Tourism Management NC State University Candice M. Bruton, MA Myron F. Floyd, PhD Jason N. Bocarro, PhD Karla H. Henderson, PhD Jonathan Casper, PhD Michael Kanters, PhD 2010 Leisure Research Symposium Minneapolis, Minnesota October 29, 2010

2. < 50% of Americans met the guideline of 30 minutes of daily moderate intensity physical activity • Multi-sectoral partnerships: a key strategy in promoting physical activity • Public park and recreation agencies and health partnership participation Background

3. Ability to achieve common goals. (Andereck, 1997) • Response to rising service demands and reduced or flat budgets (Mowen et al., 2009). • Multi-sectoral health partnerships address a multifaceted problem. • National study of P & R health partnership practices (Mowen et al., 2009). Why Partnerships?

4. To examine the relationship between organizational and personal factors and health partnership participation among NC public park and recreation departments. Purpose

5. N =216 NC governmental units. • On-line survey: May 2007. • Chi-square analyses employed. Primary Outcome Measure: • Formal partnership participation: YES or NO Definition: a group that shares resources and that can act as a formal agent. Methods

6. Levels & Classifications Organizational Factors Operating Budget Capital Budget Population Size Staff Size High, Medium, Low Director Characteristics Gender Years of Experience Years Current Position CPRP Status Male, Female High, Medium, Low High, Low Yes, No Targeted Populations Effort Boys & Girls Teen Boys & Teen Girls Adults & Youth with Disabilities Older Adults Families People with Chronic Health Conditions Low Income Individuals Minority Groups A great deal of effort, Some Effort, and Very Little to No Effort Independent Variables

7. NC Park and Recreation Departments: Organizational Capacity Characteristics

8. Results Recreational Resource Services, 2007

9. Partnership Participation among NC Park and Recreation Departments (2007) Percent

10. Associations between Partnership Participation and Department Characteristics

11. Least frequent partners were churches and YMCAs. • Departments with larger budgets and populations partner more (Mowen et al., 2009). • Targeted population groups appear unrelated to partnerships. • Gender and tenure were not related to partnership participation; CPRP status was related. Discussion

12. Findings were limited to North Carolina (2007). • Secondary data were used. • Limited measurement of partnership characteristics – e.g., • Informal partnerships • Frequency of contact • Nature of “resource sharing” Limitations

13. Levels of partnership participation are encouraging but untapped opportunities exist. • Future research needs: • What trends are occurring? • Do partnerships lead to improved health or QOL? • How do informal partnerships differ? • What benefits and challenges exist in multi-sectoral partnership work? • What is the nature of social networking structures? Conclusions

14. Thank you! Candice Bruton, Doctoral Student Parks, Recreation, & Tourism Management North Carolina State University cmbruton@ncsu.edu This research project was conducted by the Investigating Places for Active Recreation in Communities (IPARC) Initiative at North Carolina State University. It was funded in part by the North Carolina Forestry Foundation, Inc.