Are Your Asset Data as Good as You Think? Conducting a Comprehensive Census of Built Assets to Improve Urban Population Health

Abstract

Secondary data sources are widely used to measure the built asset environment, although their validity for this purpose is not well-established. Using community-engaged research methodology, this study conducted a census of public-facing, built assets via direct observation and then tested the performance of these data against widely used secondary datasets. After engaging community organizations, a community education campaign was implemented. Using web-enabled cell phones and a web-based application prepopulated with the secondary data, census workers verified, modified, and/or added assets using street-level observation, supplementing data with web searches and telephone calls. Data were uploaded to http://www.SouthSideHealth.org. Using direct observation as the criterion standard, the sensitivity of secondary datasets was calculated. Of 5,773 assets on the prepopulated list, direct observation of public-facing assets verified 1,612 as operating; another 653 operating assets were newly identified. Sensitivity of the commercial list for nonresidential, operating assets was 61 %. Using the asset census as the criterion standard, secondary datasets were incomplete and inaccurate. Comprehensive, accurate built asset data are needed to advance urban health research, inform policy, and improve individuals’ access to assets.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1.
Figure 2.

References

  1. 1.

    Franks P, Clancy CM, Gold MR. Health insurance and mortality. JAMA. 1993; 270: 737–741.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Institute of Medicine. For the Public's Health: The Role of Measurement in Action and Accountability. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Lurie N, Dubowitz T. Health disparities and access to health. JAMA. 2007; 297(10): 1118–1121.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Marmot M, Wilkinson RG, eds. Social Determinants of Health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    McGinnis JM, Foege WH. Actual causes of death in the United States. JAMA. 1993; 270(18): 2207–2212.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291(10): 1238–1245.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Block JP, Christakis NA, O’Malley AJ, Subramanian SV. Proximity to food establishments and body mass index in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring Cohort over 30 years. Am J Epidemiol. 2011; 174(10): 1108–1114.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Boone-Heinonen J, Gordon-Larsen P, Kiefe CI, Shikany JM, Lewis CE, Popkin BM. Fast food restaurants and food stores: longitudinal associations with diet in young to middle-aged adults: the CARDIA study. Arch Intern Med. 2011; 171(13): 1162–1170.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Dubowitz T, Ghosh-Dastidar M, Eibner C, et al. The Women’s Health Initiative: the food environment, neighborhood socioeconomic status, BMI, and blood pressure. Obesity. 2011; 20: 862–871. doi:10.1038/oby.2011.141.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Gordon-Larsen P, Nelson MC, Page P, Popkin BM. Inequality in the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity. Pediatrics. 2006; 117(2): 417–424.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Li F, Harmer P, Cardinal BJ, et al. Built environment and 1-year changes in weight and waist circumference in middle-aged and older adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2009; 169: 401–408.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Moreland K, Wing S, Diez Roux A. The contextual effect of the local food environment on residents’ diets: the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92(11): 1761–1767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Rundle A, Neckerman KM, Freeman L, et al. Neighborhood food environment and walkability predict obesity in New York City. Environ Health Perspect. 2008; 117(3): 442–447.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Dun and Bradstreet. Dun and Bradstreet. 2009; http://www.dnb.com/. Accessed January 4, 2011.

  15. 15.

    Grafova IB, Freedman VA, Kumar R, Rogowski J. Neighborhoods and obesity in later life. Amer J Public Health. 2008; 98(11): 2065–2071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Burdette HL, Whitaker RC. Neighborhood playgrounds, fast food restaurants, and crime: relationships to overweight in low-income preschool children. Prev Med. 2004; 38(1): 57–63.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Gibson DM. The neighborhood food environment and adult weight status: estimates from longitudinal data. Am J Public Health. 2011; 101(1): 71–78.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kelly B, Flood VM, Yeatman H. Measuring local food environments: an overview of available methods and measures. Health Place. 2011; 17(6): 1284–1293.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Maddock J. The relationship between obesity and the prevalence of fast food restaurants: state-level analysis. Am J Health Promot. 2004; 13(2): 137–143.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Nelson MC, Gordon-Larsen P, Song Y, Popkin BM. Built and social environments associations with adolescent overweight and activity. Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31(2): 109–117.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Wang MC, Cubbin C, Ahn D, Winkleby MA. Changes in neighbourhood food store environment, food behaviour and body mass index, 1981–1990. Public Health Nutr. 2008; 11(9): 963–970.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bader MD, Ailshire JA, Morenoff JD, House JS. Measurement of the local food environment: a comparison of existing data sources. Am J Epidemiol. 2010; 171(5): 609–617.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Boone JE, Gordon-Larsen P, Stewart JD, Popkin BM. Validation of a GIS facilities database: quantification and implications of error. Ann Epidemiol. 2008; 18(5): 371–377.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Lake AA, Burgoine T, Greenhalgh F, Stamp E, Tyrrell R. The foodscape: classification and field validation of secondary data sources. Health Place. 2010; 16: 666–673.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    InfoUSA. InfoUSA. 2011; http://www.infousa.com. Accessed November 8, 2011.

  26. 26.

    Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.

  27. 27.

    Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. 2011. Health Care’s Blind Side. http://www.rwjf.org. Accessed July 20, 2012.

  28. 28.

    Hill LD, Madara JL. Role of the urban academic medical center in US health care. JAMA. 2005; 294(17): 2219–2220.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Lindau S, Makelarski J, Chin M, et al. Building community-engaged health research and discovery infrastructure on the South Side of Chicago: science in service to community priorities. Prev Med. 2011; 52(3–4): 200–207.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kretzmann JP, McKnight JL. Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets. Evanston: ACTA Publications; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Santill A, Carroll-Scott A, Wong F, Ickovics J. Urban youths go 3000 miles: engaging and supporting young residents to conduct neighborhood asset mapping. Am J Public Health. 2011; 101(12): 2207–2210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Lindau S, James R, Makelarski J, Sanders E, Johnson D. Comments from the South Side of Chicago on New Haven’s Inspiring Initiative. Am J Public Health. 2012; 102(7): e3–e4.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    City of Chicago. Explore Chicago. 2011. http://www.explorechicago.org/city/en/neighborhoods.html. Accessed August 30, 2011.

  34. 34.

    U.S. Census Bureau. 2010 U.S. Census Data. 2010. http://www.census.gov. Accessed 3 January 2011.

  35. 35.

    U.S. Census Bureau. 2005–2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 2010. http://www.americanfactfinder.gov. Accessed 3 January 2011.

  36. 36.

    Lee W. Chicago South Side Mapping Project Shows Neighbors Live Worlds Apart: Students Documenting Health-Care Shortcomings—Including Lack of Healthy Foods, Medical Clinics—in Woodlawn Neighborhood. The Chicago Tribune. 2009.

  37. 37.

    Urban Institute. National Center for Charitable Statistics. 2009; http://nccs.urban.org/. Accessed May 1, 2009.

  38. 38.

    National Center for Health Statistics. National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities. 2009; http://nccs.urban.org/classification/NTEE.cfm. Accessed January 3, 2010.

  39. 39.

    U.S. Census Bureau. North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/. Accessed January 4, 2011.

  40. 40.

    Information and Referral Federation of Los Angeles County. The AIRS/211 LA County Taxonomy of Human Services. 2008; http://www.211taxonomy.org. Accessed February 7, 2011.

  41. 41.

    U.S. Department of Labor. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System. http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/sic_manual.html. Accessed January 4, 2011.

  42. 42.

    Youth Ready Chicago. 2010; http://www.youthreadychicago.org. Accessed February 2, 2011.

  43. 43.

    Google Maps Application Programming Interfaces. 2009. https://developers.google.com/maps/ Accessed October 2009.

  44. 44.

    Frieden TR. Framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid. Am J Public Health. 2010; 100(4): 590–594.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Venkatesh S. Off the Books: The Underground Economy of the Urban Poor. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2006.

  46. 46.

    STEM Education Coalition. 2011. http://www.stemedcoalition.org. Accessed November 4, 2011.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the invaluable input from our community partners who guided and co-led us in the development and implementation of the asset census methodology. We would also like to acknowledge the efforts of literacy expert Shane Desautels, software engineer Evgeny Selkov, graphic designer Jola Glotzer, and GIS specialist Todd Schuble as well as Scott Allard and Jennifer Mosley for their significant input on the use of secondary datasets and data collection methodologies. We would also like to acknowledge the efforts of the South Side Health and Vitality Studies staff who provided ongoing support to this project and without which none of this would have occurred. This project was supported by the South Side Health and Vitality Studies (P.I. Stacy Lindau, MD, MAPP). The South Side Health and Vitality Studies are supported by funding from the University of Chicago Medical Center Division of the Biological Sciences; the Office of the Urban Health Initiative; the Walter G. Zoller Memorial Fund at the University of Chicago; the Chicago Community Trust; the George Kaiser Family Foundation; the Otho S. A. Sprague Memorial Institute; Patricia O. Cox, and the National Institute on Aging at the National Institutes of Health (K23AG032870 and 1RC4AG039176-01). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Aging or the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer A. Makelarski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Makelarski, J.A., Lindau, S.T., Fabbre, V.D. et al. Are Your Asset Data as Good as You Think? Conducting a Comprehensive Census of Built Assets to Improve Urban Population Health. J Urban Health 90, 586–601 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9764-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Urban health
  • Built environment
  • Asset mapping
  • Asset census
  • Community-engaged research methodology
  • Population health