You are on page 1of 127

2014

Actively Moving America to Better Health


Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report is supported by a grant from the WellPoint Foundation. The opinions expressed in this report are
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the WellPoint Foundation.

ACSM American Fitness Index Advisory Board


Chair: Walter R. Thompson, Ph.D., FACSM
(Georgia State University)

NiCole Keith, Ph.D., FACSM


(Indiana University/Regenstrief Institute, Inc.)

Vice-Chair: Barbara E. Ainsworth, Ph.D., M.P.H., FACSM, FNAK


(Arizona State University)

Roseann M. Lyle, Ph.D., FACSM


(Purdue University)

Steven N. Blair, P.E.D., FACSM


(University of South Carolina)

Melinda M. Manore, Ph.D., R.D., FACSM


(Oregon State University)

Jacqueline Epping, M.Ed., FACSM


(U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

Kenneth E. Powell, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM


(Epidemiologic and Public Health Consultant)

John M. Jakicic, Ph.D., FACSM


(University of Pittsburgh)

Angela Smith, M.D., FACSM


(Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children)

Liz Joy, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM


(Intermountain Healthcare/
University of Utah School of Medicine)

Stella Lucia Volpe, Ph.D., R.D., LDN, FACSM


(Drexel University)

Report Authors
Brenda E. Chamness, M.S., MCHES
Senior Director, Strategic Health Programs
Terrell W. Zollinger, Dr.P.H.
Professor Emeritus, Indiana University
Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
Principal, T. Zollinger and Associates, LLC
Jessica M. Coffing, M.P.H.
Research Associate, T. Zollinger and Associates, LLC

Walter R. Thompson, Ph.D., FACSM


Regents Professor, Georgia State University
Chair, ACSM American Fitness Index Advisory Board
Barbara E. Ainsworth, Ph.D., M.P.H., FACSM, FNAK
Regents Professor, Arizona State University
Vice-Chair, ACSM American Fitness Index Advisory Board
Marie Lewis, CHES
Program Coordinator, American Fitness Index

ACSM American Fitness Index Research Team


Terrell W. Zollinger, Dr.P.H.
Professor Emeritus, Indiana University
Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
Principal, T. Zollinger and Associates, LLC

Jessica M. Coffing, M.P.H.


Research Associate, T. Zollinger and Associates, LLC
Derek A. Zollinger, MS
Research Associate, T. Zollinger and Associates, LLC

American College of Sports Medicine Staff


Brenda E. Chamness, M.S., MCHES
Senior Director, Strategic Health Programs

Marie Lewis, CHES


Program Coordinator, American Fitness Index

Questions and comments on the report should be directed to the American College of Sports Medicine at afi@acsm.org.

Report design by Kern Graphic Design, Indianapolis, Indiana (www.kerngraphicdesign.com).

ACSM AMERICAN FITNESS INDEX


HEALTH AND COMMUNITY
FITNESS STATUS OF THE
50 LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS
2014 Edition

Table of Contents
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................................................................................ 7
Background and Need for Action.............................................................................................................................................................9
ACSM American Fitness Index Program........................................................................................................................................... 10
ACSM American Fitness Index Program Components......................................................................................................... 10
Implementation........................................................................................................................................................................................ 10
ACSM American Fitness Index Advisory Board....................................................................................................................... 11
ACSM American Fitness Index Guiding Principles for Healthy Communities.............................................................12
Methodology.....................................................................................................................................................................................................12
Why Choose MSAs Over Cities?........................................................................................................................................................12
How Were the Indicators Selected for the Data Index?..........................................................................................................12
What Data Sources Were Used to Create the Data Index?....................................................................................................13
How Was the Data Index Built?..........................................................................................................................................................13
How Should the Scores and Ranks Be Interpreted?................................................................................................................ 14
How Were the Areas of Excellence and Improvement Priority Areas Determined?................................................. 14
What Are the Limitations of the AFI Data Report?.................................................................................................................. 14
References...................................................................................................................................................................................................15
Metropolitan Area Snapshots
Atlanta, GA................................................................................................................................................................................................ 16
Austin, TX................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Baltimore, MD........................................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Birmingham, AL.......................................................................................................................................................................................22
Boston, MA................................................................................................................................................................................................ 24
Buffalo, NY................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26
Charlotte, NC........................................................................................................................................................................................... 28
Chicago, IL................................................................................................................................................................................................ 30
Cincinnati, OH...........................................................................................................................................................................................32
Cleveland, OH.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 34
Columbus, OH.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Dallas, TX................................................................................................................................................................................................... 38
Denver, CO................................................................................................................................................................................................40
Detroit, MI................................................................................................................................................................................................. 42
Hartford, CT..............................................................................................................................................................................................44
Houston, TX.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 46

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Metropolitan Area Snapshots (continued)


Indianapolis, IN........................................................................................................................................................................................ 48
Jacksonville, FL....................................................................................................................................................................................... 50
Kansas City, MO-KS................................................................................................................................................................................52
Las Vegas, NV ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 54
Los Angeles, CA..................................................................................................................................................................................... 56
Louisville, KY............................................................................................................................................................................................. 58
Memphis, TN.............................................................................................................................................................................................60
Miami, FL.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 62
Milwaukee, WI......................................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN .................................................................................................................................................................... 66
Nashville, TN............................................................................................................................................................................................ 68
New Orleans, LA..................................................................................................................................................................................... 70
New York, NY............................................................................................................................................................................................72
Oklahoma City, OK..................................................................................................................................................................................74
Orlando, FL.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 76
Philadelphia, PA........................................................................................................................................................................................78
Phoenix, AZ...............................................................................................................................................................................................80
Pittsburgh, PA.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 82
Portland, OR............................................................................................................................................................................................. 84
Providence, RI.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 86
Raleigh, NC............................................................................................................................................................................................... 88
Richmond, VA..........................................................................................................................................................................................90
Riverside, CA............................................................................................................................................................................................ 92
Sacramento, CA...................................................................................................................................................................................... 94
Saint Louis, MO-IL.................................................................................................................................................................................. 96
Salt Lake City, UT.................................................................................................................................................................................... 98
San Antonio, TX.................................................................................................................................................................................... 100
San Diego, CA.........................................................................................................................................................................................102
San Francisco, CA................................................................................................................................................................................ 104
San Jose, CA........................................................................................................................................................................................... 106
Seattle, WA............................................................................................................................................................................................. 108
Tampa, FL..........................................................................................................................................................................................110
Virginia Beach, VA................................................................................................................................................................................. 112
Washington, DC......................................................................................................................................................................................114
Appendix A Data Sources......................................................................................................................................................................116
Appendix B Members of the Expert Panel.....................................................................................................................................119
Appendix C U.S. Values, MSA Averages and MSA Ranges for AFI Indicators................................................................. 121
Appendix D Counties in MSAs............................................................................................................................................................ 123

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

May 2014

Dear Colleagues,
As the founding sponsor of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) American Fitness Index
(AFI), the WellPoint Foundation is proud to continue its support of this healthy lifestyle measurement
and improvement guide.
Developed by some of the leading sports medicine professionals and exercise scientists in the country, AFIs
scientific, data-driven report provides an effective measure of health and community fitness in Americas 50
most populous metropolitan areas. The report is designed to help leaders assess their citys strengths and
challenges and advocate for policy changes and investments necessary to make improvements.
This year, we are pleased to announce the addition of new data indicators that further strengthen the
science behind the report. Walk Score promotes walkable neighborhoods, one of the best solutions for our
health, the environment and economic improvement of urban areas. Walkability of neighborhoods has been
shown to have a positive impact on health, including reducing obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.
As the philanthropic arm of WellPoint, Inc., the Foundation has granted more than $146 million to organizations
such as ACSM that support healthy living and health improvement across generations. We are committed to
being Americas valued health partner by aiding awareness and education endeavors.
Please visit AmericanFitnessIndex.org and WellPointFoundation.org to learn more about how we can foster
positive change in the health and wellness of our communities and our country.
Best regards,

Sam Nussbaum
Executive Vice President,
Clinical Health Policy
and Chief Medical Officer

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Executive Summary
With support and funding from the WellPoint Foundation in 2007, the American College of Sports Medicine
(ACSM) launched the ACSM American Fitness IndexTM (AFI) program in 2008 to help communities identify
opportunities to improve the health of their residents and expand community assets to better support active,
healthy lifestyles. The AFI reflects a composite of personal health measures, preventive health behaviors,
levels of chronic disease conditions, as well as environmental and community resources and policies that
support physical activity. In addition, demographic and economic diversity are included for each metropolitan
area to illustrate the unique attributes of each city. Communities with the highest AFI scores are considered
to have strong community fitness, a concept analogous to individuals having strong personal fitness.
The 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States, as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and
Budget using data from the U.S. Census Annual Estimates of Population, were included in this 2014 data
report for the AFI program. Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) were chosen as the unit of measurement
because they represent the group of counties comprising the larger urban areas where residents live, work
and access community resources.
The AFI program is unique for several reasons:
Cities are defined by MSAs;
P
 ersonal health indicators, as well as community and environmental indicators, are included
in the data report;
D
 ata come from reputable sources, and scientific methodologies are used to ensure validity and reliability;
U
 nique areas of strength and opportunities for improvement are included for each MSA to help
guide community action;
M
 aterials, resources and connections to health promotion partners are provided by the AFI program to
help cities improve their indicators; and
L
 ocal, state and national health promotion partners form a network to support collaborative program efforts.
The first step in creating the report for the AFI program involved developing a strategy to identify, gather,
analyze and present MSA-level data on the population, health and built environment of the communities.
Measures were identified, assessed and scored by a national expert panel for inclusion into an index to
compare each MSAs attributes with the overall U.S. values and with the other large metropolitan areas.
Based on the comparisons to benchmarks, suggested areas of excellence and improvement priority areas
for each MSA were noted.
There was considerable diversity in community fitness levels among the 50 MSAs. Cities that ranked near
the top of the index have more strengths that support healthy living and fewer challenges that hinder it.
The opposite is true for cities near the bottom of the index. All cities are commended for their areas of
excellence and encouraged to focus future efforts on their improvement priority areas to achieve a
healthy and active population.

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

Rank

Metropolitan Area

SCORE

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA
Salt Lake City, UT
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT
Raleigh-Cary, NC
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA
Pittsburgh, PA
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Richmond, VA
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA
Baltimore-Towson, MD
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
Jacksonville, FL
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
Kansas City, MO-KS
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ
Las Vegas-Paradise, NV
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA
Columbus, OH
Saint Louis, MO-IL
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
Birmingham-Hoover, AL
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX
Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN
Oklahoma City, OK
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN
Memphis, TN-MS-AR

77.3
73.5
72.1
71.7
71.0
69.4
69.3
69.2
69.1
66.9
65.7
63.8
61.5
60.6
56.6
56.0
54.8
54.5
53.4
52.9
52.3
52.0
51.6
51.5
50.8
49.0
48.1
47.5
47.2
46.6
46.0
45.7
45.4
45.1
44.0*
44.0*
43.7
42.6
42.4
41.3*
41.3*
40.8
37.3
35.9
35.6
32.5
32.3
31.6
25.7
24.8

*T
 he scores shown have been rounded to the nearest tenth of a point resulting in some apparent ties; however, the
rankings are based on the full calculated score values that were not equal in those cases.
This 2014 edition report used revised methods from the first six full-edition reports released in 2008 to 2013, including
additional measures not included in the earlier reports; consequently, comparisons of scores for 2014 should not be
made with earlier AFI reports. However, many of the individual personal health and community/environmental indicators
did not change and can be compared to individual measures included in the earlier AFI reports. The long-range vision for
the AFI program is to provide annual updates to the indicators and scores so cities can monitor their progress in improving
their health and active living fitness indicators.

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Background and Need for Action


Physical activity for all!

Being physically active is one of the most important ways adults and children can improve and maintain
their overall health.1-5 For adults, regular exercise can reduce the risk of premature death, heart disease,
stroke, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, breast cancer, colon cancer and the risk of falls. For children
and adolescents, regular physical activity can decrease body fat and improve bone health, cardiorespiratory
fitness and muscular strength. Physical activity can also decrease the risk of depression in adults and reduce
depression symptoms in young people.2-5
Emerging public health information suggests that to reach the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions
goal to improve health and fitness, prevent disease and disability, and enhance quality of life for all Americans
through physical activity, we must create a culture that integrates physical activity into our daily lives.1 The
ACSM American Fitness Index (AFI) program developed a valid and reliable measure of health and community
fitness at a metropolitan level to:
p
 rovide community leaders with information to understand the personal, community, societal
and environmental influences on physical activity and healthy eating;
d
 evelop strategies to promote physical activity at multiple levels of influence;
t ake action through local community mobilization with the AFI Community Action Guide,
health promotion partners and other best practices;6 and
monitor changes in the measures as a result of community programs and other factors.
While the AFI data report provides detailed information for cities at the MSA level, the My AFI
(http://americanfitnessindex.com/my-afi/) community application tool integrates the components
of the AFI program into a health promotion approach that can be used by other communities not included
in the AFI data report. Using this tool, leaders can understand the individual, societal and behavioral factors
related to physical activity in their own community and implement culturally focused activities that are
meaningful to their residents.
Overall, the goal of the AFI program is to help improve the health of the nation and promote active lifestyles
by supporting local programming to develop a sustainable, healthy community culture. To accomplish this
goal, community leaders and health planners need to be aware of their communitys health status and
behaviors; key indicators, such as obesity and chronic disease rates and number of health care providers,
related to physical inactivity; built environment and resources; and policies that support a healthy community.
The AFI program is specifically designed to provide these data and other valuable assistance to cities to
further their efforts to improve the health and quality of life of residents, promote healthier lifestyles and
encourage community resource development to support physical activity.

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Program


With support and funding from the WellPoint Foundation (www.wellpointfoundation.org), the AFI program
was created to develop a valid and reliable measure of the health and community fitness at the metropolitan
level in the United States. The AFI program provides valuable resources that can help communities focus
their programming efforts as well as assist them in developing collaborative activities and partnerships with
other organizations that contribute to health promotion. Using the AFI data report, communities will be able
to identify opportunities to improve the health status of their residents. Additionally, as communities implement
targeted programs to improve health status and environmental resources, they will be able to measure their
progress using the relevant AFI elements in future reports.

ACSM American Fitness Index Program Components

The AFI program improves the health, fitness and quality of life of citizens through three key components:
Data: Collect, aggregate and report metropolitan-level data related to healthy lifestyles, health
outcomes and community resources that support a physically active society. Disseminate the AFI
data report to give an accurate snapshot of the health status and contributing factors in major
metropolitan areas across the nation.
Resources: Serve as a resource for promoting and integrating research, education and practical
applications of sports medicine and exercise science to maintain and enhance physical performance,
fitness, health and quality of life.
Health Promotion Partners: Help communities connect and partner with existing organizations
and local, state and national programs on physical activity and healthy lifestyles initiatives.

Implementation

This seventh full-edition data report for the AFI program focuses on data collection and analysis for the 50
largest metropolitan areas in the United States. The programs data report shows the results of identifying,
collecting, analyzing, weighing, and aggregating relevant data at the metropolitan level.
The metropolitan areas in this report represent the 50 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) defined
by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget using data from the U.S. Census Annual Estimates of Population.
They are the cities and surrounding metropolitan areas of:
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX
Baltimore-Towson, MD
Birmingham-Hoover, AL
Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC
Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
Columbus, OH
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN
Jacksonville, FL
Kansas City, MO-KS

Las Vegas-Paradise, NV
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN
Memphis, TN-MS-AR

10

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL


Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA
Oklahoma City, OK
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ
Pittsburgh, PA
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA
Raleigh-Cary, NC

Richmond, VA
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA
Saint Louis, MO-IL
Salt Lake City, UT
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV

ACSM American Fitness Index Advisory Board

The AFI program would not be possible without direction from the knowledgeable volunteers who make up
the AFI Advisory Board. The AFI Advisory Board is comprised of experts with a vested interest in the fields
of health and physical activity who volunteer their time to support the mission of the AFI program.
The AFI Advisory Board was created in 2007 to assist in the development of the AFI program and continues
to offer on-going guidance to the program. Members of the AFI Advisory Board assure the AFI data report
and overall program adhere to the ACSM Guiding Principles for Healthy Communities and the goals of the
AFI program by:
translating the science into practice;
actively participating in strategic planning for the program;
critically reviewing all program documentation and collateral materials; and
providing expert guidance and feedback to communities.
ACSM greatly appreciates the contributions of our AFI Advisory Board members:
Chair: Walter R. Thompson, Ph.D., FACSM (Georgia State University)
Vice-Chair: Barbara Ainsworth, Ph.D., M.P.H., FACSM, FNAK (Arizona State University)
Steven N. Blair, P.E.D., FACSM (University of South Carolina)
Jacqueline Epping, M.Ed., FACSM (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
John M. Jakicic, Ph.D., FACSM (University of Pittsburgh)
Liz Joy, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM (Intermountain Healthcare/University of Utah School of Medicine)
NiCole Keith, Ph.D., FACSM (Indiana University/Regenstrief Institute, Inc.)
Roseann M. Lyle, Ph.D., FACSM (Purdue University)
Melinda M. Manore, Ph.D., R.D., FACSM (Oregon State University)
Kenneth E. Powell, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM (Epidemiologic and Public Health Consultant)
Angela Smith, M.D., FACSM (Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children )
Stella Lucia Volpe, Ph.D., R.D., LDN, FACSM (Drexel University)

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

11

ACSM American Fitness Index Guiding Principles for Healthy Communities

O
 verall health improvement in U.S. cities requires a focus on the prevention of behavioral-linked
diseases by effectively addressing the underlying unhealthy behaviors and community factors.
The rise in chronic diseases attributable to physical inactivity and unhealthy diets are a clear and
present danger to our health and health care systems, our cities, our nation and our future.
All cities in the U.S., irrespective of size and current health status, can make significant advances
in improving the health of their people through simple, affordable, effective steps.
There is a need for even more synergy and collaboration to assist U.S. cities in actively making
the moves toward better health.
The AFI program will contribute to the Guiding Principles for Healthy Communities by creating effective
partnerships and alliances at the national and local levels; by providing tools, strategies and expertise to
cities and communities desiring to improve the health of their residents; and by supporting practices and
policies that have proven to be effective.

Methodology
Scientific evidence, expert opinion and statistical methodologies were employed to select, weigh and
combine the elements used to produce the AFI data report.

Why Choose MSAs Over Cities?

Defining a city by its city limits overlooks the interaction between the core of the city and the surrounding
suburban areas. Residents outside the city limits have access to fitness-related resources in their suburban
area as well as the city core; likewise, the residents within the city limits may access resources in the
surrounding areas. Thus, the metropolitan area, including both the city core and the surrounding suburban
areas, act as a unit to support the wellness efforts of residents of the area. Consequently, the MSA data were
used where possible in constructing the AFI. It is understood that various parts of the central city and
surrounding suburban area may have very different demographic and health behavior characteristics, as well
as access to community-level resources to support physical activity. Currently, the nationally available data
needed to measure these characteristics and resources are not available to allow comparisons of all of the
smaller geographical levels in the MSAs. However, it would be possible for communities within the MSA to
collect local data using the measurements and strategy outlined in My AFI (http://americanfitnessindex.com/
my-afi/) to identify opportunities and to monitor improvements occurring as a result of their initiatives.
In February 2013, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a bulletin pertaining to how
MSAs were to be identified based on the 2010 census. Previous to that, MSAs were still being identified
based on the 2000 census and standards.
As the data for the MSAs were collected prior to the OMB bulletin, and the understanding that the bulletin
was meant for future data collections, we decided to utilize the previous MSA definitions as they were
defined by the most recent OMB bulletin prior to this one, released in December 2009.7

How Were the Indicators Selected for the Data Index?

Elements included in the data index must have met the following criteria to be included:
Be related to the level of health status and/or physical activity environment for the MSA;
Be measured recently and reported by a reputable agency or organization;
Be available to the public;
Be measured routinely and provided in a timely fashion; and
Be modifiable through community effort (for example, smoking rate is included, climate is not).

12

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

What Data Sources Were Used to Create the Data Index?

The most current publicly available data at the time of analysis from federal reports and past studies provided
the information used in this version of the data index. The largest single data source for the personal health
indicators was the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) provided by the U.S. Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. Through a survey, conducted by the Center for City Park Excellence, the Trust for
Public Land provided many of the community/environmental indicators, and the U.S. Census American
Community Survey was the source for most of the MSA descriptions. The U.S. Department of Agriculture;
State Report Cards (School Health Policies and Programs Study by the CDC); and the Federal Bureau of
Investigations (FBI) Uniform Crime Reporting Program also provided data used in the MSA description
and index. The data index elements and their data sources are shown in Appendix A.

How Was the Data Index Built?

Potential initial elements for the AFI data index were scored for relevance by a panel of 26 health and
physical activity experts in 2008 (listed in Appendix B). Two Delphi methodtype rounds of scoring were
used to reach consensus on whether each item should be included in the data index and the weight it
should carry in the calculations.
From this process, 31 currently available indicators were identified and weighted for the index and 16
description variables were selected. The description elements were not included in the data index
calculation, but were shown for cities to use for comparison purposes. A weight of 1 was assigned to
those elements that were considered to be of little importance by the panel of experts; 2 for those items
considered to be of moderate importance; and 3 to those elements considered of high importance to
include in the data index. Each item used in the scoring was first ranked (worse value = 1) and then
multiplied by the weight assigned by consensus of the expert panel. The weighted ranks were then summed
by indicator group to create scores for the personal health indicators and community/environmental indicators.
Finally, the MSA scores were standardized to a scale with the upper limit of 100 by dividing the MSA score
by the maximum possible value and multiplying by 100. Note that the changes made in the measures for
2014 reduced the number of indicators by 1 for a total of 30 indicators.
The following formula summarizes the scoring process:

n
MSA Scorek = (( rki wki)/MSA Scoremax)*100

i=1
r = MSA rank on indicator
w = weight assigned to indicator
k = indicator group
n = 15 for personal health indicators and 16 for community/environmental indicators
MSA Scoremax = hypothetical score if an MSA ranked best on each of the elements
The individual weights also were averaged for both indicator groups to create the total score. Both the
indicator group scores and the total scores for the 50 cities were then ranked (best = 1) as shown on the
Metropolitan Area Snapshots.

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

13

How Should the Scores and Ranks Be Interpreted?

It is important to consider both the score and rank for each city. While the ranking lists the MSAs from the
highest score to the lowest score, the scores for many cities are very similar, indicating that there is relatively
little difference among them. For example, the score for San Jose was 69.4 while the score for Seattle was
69.3. While San Jose was ranked higher than Seattle, these two metropolitan areas were actually very similar
across all of the indicators; thus, there is little difference in the community wellness levels of the two MSAs.
Also, while one city carried the highest rank (Washington, DC) and another carried the lowest rank (Memphis,
TN), this does not necessarily mean that the highest ranked city has excellent values across all indicators and
the lowest ranked city has the lowest values on all the indicators. The ranking merely indicates that, relative
to each other, some cities scored better than others.
The data elements used in AFI were reviewed and updated in 2014. Specifically, BRFSS made significant
changes in the survey items used to determine food intake information and physical activity level. In
addition, percent covered by health insurance and primary care provider to population ratio measures were
removed because the experts felt these measures did not significantly impact fitness levels. Finally, a new
environmental/community measure, Walk Score ranking, was added. Consequently, comparisons between
the 2014 AFI individual elements that did not change can be compared with earlier years data, but the
overall score and the sub-scores for 2014 are not comparable to earlier years.

How Were the Areas of Excellence and Improvement Priority Areas Determined?

The Areas of Excellence and Improvement Priority Areas for each MSA were listed to assist communities in
identifying potential areas where they might focus their efforts using approaches adopted by those cities
that have strengths in the same area. This process involved comparing the data index elements of the
MSA to a newly developed target goal. The target goals for the personal health indicators were derived
by generating the 90th percentile from the pooled 2008-2012 AFI data. For those new personal health
indicators, the target goal was 90% of the 2014 values. The target goals for the community health indicators
were derived by calculating the average from the pooled 2008-2012 AFI data. New community indicators
target goals were an average from the 2014 values. Data indicators with values equal to or better than the
target goal were considered Areas of Excellence. Data indicators with values worse than 20% of the target
goal were listed as Improvement Priority Areas.

What Are the Limitations of the AFI Data Report?

The items used for the personal health indicators were based on self-reported responses to the Behavioral
Risk Factor Surveillance Survey and are subject to the well-known limitations of self-reported data. Since
this limitation applies to all metropolitan areas included in this report, the biases should be similar across all
areas, so the relative differences should still be relatively valid. In addition, the BRFSS data collection method
changed in 2011 relative to weighting methodology and the addition of the cell phone sampling frame; thus
measures before and after 2011 are not exactly comparable. As per advice provided on the FBI Uniform
Crime Reporting Program website, violent crime rates were not compared to U.S. values or averages of all
MSAs. As indicated on the FBI website, data on violent crimes may not be comparable across all metropolitan
areas because of differences in law enforcement policies and practices from area to area. The Trust for Public
Land community/environmental indicators only includes city-level data, not data for the complete MSA.
Consequently, most of the community/environmental indicators shown on the MSA tables are for the main
city in the MSA and do not include resources in the rest of the MSA.

14

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

References

1. N
 ational Physical Activity Plan. (May 2010). Retrieved from http://www.physicalactivityplan.org/
NationalPhysicalActivityPlan.pdf
2. C
 enters for Disease Control and Prevention (2010, Dec 29). Physical Activity. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/
3. A
 merican College of Sports Medicine. (2007). About ACSM. Retrieved from http://www.acsm.org/am/
template.cfm?section=about_acsm
4. U
 .S. Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People 2020. (n.d.). Physical Activity. Retrieved
from http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=33
5. U
 .S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
Physical activity guidelines advisory committee report, 2008. Washington: HHS, 2008.
6. S
 allis, J. F., Cervero, R. B., Ascher, W., Henderson, K. A., Kraft, M. K., & Kerr, J. (2006). An ecological
approach to creating active living communities. Annual Review of Public Health, 27, 297-322.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102100
7. U
 .S. Office of Management and Budget. (2009) Update of Statistical Area Definitions and Guidance on
Their Uses. (OMB Bulletin No. 10-02). Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
omb/assets/bulletins/b10-02.pdf

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

15

ATLANTA, GA

(Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 56.0; Rank = 16


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer dog parks per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA MSA
Population
5,457,831
Percent less than 18 years old
25.9%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.3%
Percent 65 years old and older
9.9%
Percent male
48.7%
Percent high school graduate or higher
87.8%
Percent White
56.1%
Percent Black or African American
32.8%
Percent Asian
5.1%
Percent Other Race
6.0%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
10.6%
Percent unemployed
11.1%
Median household income
$54,628
Percent of households below poverty level
13.2%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
408.6
Percent with disability
9.6%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

16

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 63.9; Rank = 14

Atlanta Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


81.6%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%

32.2%

21.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

28.0%
Percent with angina or
coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

15.7%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

Percent
with asthma

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

54.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

27.2%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

27.1%
21.3%

32.4%

33.3%

7.9%
6.5%
4.3%
2.8%
9.5%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
17.8%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

189.0

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
15.4
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 48.2; Rank = 29


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

5.7%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

8.8

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

Dog parks/100,000
18.6

0.4
0.9
2.0
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

11.5

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.9%

1.1
0.9
6.6

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%

Recreational centers/20,000

1.5%
2.8%

1.3
1.0
4.1

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

46.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.5
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Atlanta Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.2
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$67.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

17

AUSTIN, TX

(Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 60.6; Rank = 14


Areas of Excellence (at or better than of target goal):
Higher percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
More dog parks per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX MSA
Population
1,834,303
Percent less than 18 years old
24.9%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
66.4%
Percent 65 years old and older
8.7%
Percent male
50.1%
Percent high school graduate or higher
88.1%
Percent White
80.2%
Percent Black or African American
7.4%
Percent Asian
4.9%
Percent Other Race
7.5%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
31.9%
Percent unemployed
7.1%
Median household income
$59,433
Percent of households below poverty level
10.6%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
292.7
Percent with disability
9.7%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

18

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 72.0 Rank = 9

Austin Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


78.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

82.6%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma

32.7%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

19.6%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

51.0%
61.0%
36.0%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

22.1%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

21.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

26.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

27.1%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Percent
with diabetes

35.3%
29.2%
7.9%
6.5%
3.0%
2.8%
8.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Percent
obese

167.1

14.0%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

151.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
12.4
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 49.5 Rank = 27


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

18.2%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Austin Target Goal**

Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

37.2

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

2.3%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

2.9%

1.4
2.3
0.6
0.9
3.4

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000
2.8%

WalkScore

1.4
0.9

Park playgrounds/10,000

11.5 18.0

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

4.1
0.6
1.0
4.5

Swimming pools/100,000
35.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.9

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.4
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$68.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

19

BALTIMORE, MD
(Baltimore-Towson, MD MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 50.8; Rank = 25


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Baltimore-Towson, MD MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

2,753,149
22.5%
64.2%
13.3%
48.1%
89.3%
62.0%
28.8%
4.9%
4.3%
4.9%
8.6%
$66,970
7.9%
621.2
11.0%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

20

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 41.5 Rank = 33

Baltimore Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


75.6%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma

30.0%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

13.3%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

Percent
with diabetes

19.6%
189.0
18.4%

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%
33.3%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

52.8%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

21.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

25.2%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

28.5%

167.1

29.2%
10.3%
6.5%
4.7%
2.8%
10.5%
6.4%
208.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease
Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

32.6%

167.1
20.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 60.0 Rank = 13


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Dog parks/100,000

7.7
18.6

1.9
0.3
0.9
3.1

Park playgrounds/10,000

22.9
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
6.5%

2.3
0.8
0.9
6.6

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.0%
2.8%

1.7
1.0
3.5

Swimming pools/100,000
66.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

9.5%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Baltimore Target Goal**

3.1
1.7
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$56.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

21

BIRMINGHAM, AL
(Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 35.9; Rank = 44


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability
22

1,136,650
23.6%
62.6%
13.7%
48.1%
86.6%
66.8%
28.5%
1.4%
3.3%
4.3%
8.7%
$46,763
13.4%
565.1
14.6%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 23.6 Rank = 47

Birmingham Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


74.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

34.6%
21.3%

82.6%
45.2%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

24.1%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

16.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
23.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

14.8%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

36.8%

38.8%

7.8%
6.5%
4.9%
2.8%
11.1%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

22.1%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

224.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
20.4
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 48.0 Rank = 31


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

10.4
18.6

0.4
0.9
3.5

Park playgrounds/10,000
24.6
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
0.6%

2.3
0.9
0.9
4.7

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

1.1%
2.8%

WalkScore

4.1
1.6
1.0
7.4

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

33.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.7
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

2.5%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Birmingham Target Goal**

3.9

Tennis courts/10,000

2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$1.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

23

BOSTON, MA

(Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 69.1; Rank = 9


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Description of Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH MSA
Population
4,640,802
Percent less than 18 years old
21.0%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
65.2%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.7%
Percent male
48.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
90.7%
Percent White
78.2%
Percent Black or African American
7.9%
Percent Asian
6.9%
Percent Other Race
7.0%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
9.6%
Percent unemployed
7.9%
Median household income
$71,738
Percent of households below poverty level
7.5%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
355.2
Percent with disability
10.5%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

24

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 75.2 Rank = 6

Boston Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


21.5%

Percent
obese

80.4%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

21.3%

82.6%
59.7%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
33.4%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

15.9%

34.6%
29.2%
9.7%
6.5%
4.0%
2.8%
7.9%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

34.8%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

21.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

28.4%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

14.3%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

158.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
12.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 63.0 Rank = 10


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

15.8%

2.3
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

7.6
18.6

0.5
0.9
3.4

Park playgrounds/10,000
34.0
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
12.2%

2.3
0.3
0.9
5.7

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

6.4%
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000
80.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Boston Target Goal**

4.1
0.0
1.0
1.1
3.1
1.5
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$110.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

25

BUFFALO, NY

(Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 47.2; Rank = 29


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability
26

1,134,210
20.9%
62.9%
16.2%
48.4%
90.4%
80.9%
12.1%
2.6%
4.4%
4.3%
7.8%
$50,269
10.6%
442.5
12.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 40.7 Rank = 34

Buffalo Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


77.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

26.6%
21.3%

82.6%
50.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

28.4%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.0%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
34.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

13.2%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

38.6%
30.4%
36.2%
29.2%
10.2%
6.5%
4.1%
2.8%
12.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
21.2%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

218.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
17.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 53.7 Rank = 23


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Recreational Facilities

7.1%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

2.3
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

6.9
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

3.0%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.4%

0.4
0.9
2.3
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

23.8

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

1.5
0.9
7.7

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

0.7
1.0
3.7

Swimming pools/100,000
65.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Buffalo Target Goal**

3.1
2.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$32.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

27

CHARLOTTE, NC

(Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 48.1; Rank = 27


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Lower death rate for diabetes
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC MSA
Population
2,296,569
Percent less than 18 years old
25.5%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.8%
Percent 65 years old and older
10.7%
Percent male
48.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
87.6%
Percent White
66.9%
Percent Black or African American
23.9%
Percent Asian
3.4%
Percent Other Race
5.8%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
10.2%
Percent unemployed
10.3%
Median household income
$52,470
Percent of households below poverty level
11.9%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
N/A
Percent with disability
9.9%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

28

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 62.5 Rank = 16

Charlotte Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

80.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

27.5%
21.3%

82.6%
54.7%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
24.4%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

16.7%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

29.6%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.1%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

31.0%
29.2%
7.4%
6.5%
3.4%
2.8%
10.4%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

26.7%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

18.2%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

173.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
14.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 34.0 Rank = 46


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Recreational Facilities

5.5%

Ball diamonds/10,000

0.8
1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

20.3

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

2.1%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.8%

0.9
1.3
2.3
0.5
0.9
2.6

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

WalkScore

0.7

Park playgrounds/10,000

13.9

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Swimming pools/100,000
24.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Charlotte Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

4.1
0.5
1.0
0.5
3.1
1.5
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$64.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

29

CHICAGO, IL

(Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 56.6; Rank = 15


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL-IN-WI MSA
Population
9,522,434
Percent less than 18 years old
24.5%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.5%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.0%
Percent male
48.9%
Percent high school graduate or higher
86.8%
Percent White
66.9%
Percent Black or African American
17.1%
Percent Asian
5.9%
Percent Other Race
10.1%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
21.3%
Percent unemployed
10.8%
Median household income
$59,261
Percent of households below poverty level
11.1%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
N/A
Percent with disability
9.9%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

30

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 58.3 Rank = 19

Chicago Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

78.6%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

27.4%
21.3%

82.6%
51.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

27.2%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

21.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
33.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

15.7%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

40.9%

38.4%

7.9%
6.5%
3.5%
2.8%
8.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
17.7%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

193.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 54.9 Rank = 21.5


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Dog parks/100,000

4.4
18.6

1.9
0.6
0.9
1.8

Park playgrounds/10,000

22.3
13.1

Golf courses/100,000

11.1%

Park units/10,000

2.3
0.4
0.9
2.0
4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.9%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
75.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.5

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

8.6%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Chicago Target Goal**

1.8
1.0
2.0
3.1
2.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$149.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

31

CINCINNATI, OH

(Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 54.5; Rank = 18


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN MSA
Population
2,128,603
Percent less than 18 years old
24.4%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
62.7%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.8%
Percent male
48.8%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.3%
Percent White
83.0%
Percent Black or African American
12.1%
Percent Asian
2.0%
Percent Other Race
2.9%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
2.7%
Percent unemployed
8.3%
Median household income
$52,439
Percent of households below poverty level
11.2%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
284.5
Percent with disability
11.8%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

32

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 34.9 Rank = 41

Cincinnati Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


76.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

28.5%
21.3%

82.6%
54.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

28.3%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

17.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
28.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

12.4%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

35.2%

34.4%

10.0%
6.5%
5.2%
2.8%
12.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
22.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

189.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
22.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 73.8 Rank = 3


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

13.7%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Cincinnati Target Goal**

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

20.5

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

1.2
0.9
4.5

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

22.1

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.8%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

2.1%

2.1
0.9
10.9

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000
2.8%

4.1
1.5
1.0
7.8

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

50.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.6
1.9

Tennis courts/10,000

3.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$225.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

33

CLEVELAND, OH

(Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 45.4; Rank = 33


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer dog parks per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

2,063,535
22.4%
61.7%
15.9%
48.1%
88.5%
74.5%
20.4%
2.0%
3.1%
5.0%
9.9%
$46,944
12.0%
N/A
13.6%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

34

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 37.5 Rank = 38

Cleveland Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

76.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

27.6%
21.3%

82.6%
51.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

26.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

21.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

29.2%
11.2%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

13.0%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.2%

Percent
with asthma
30.9%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

34.9%
30.4%

5.2%

12.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
22.2%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

208.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
23.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 53.3 Rank = 25


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

6.3%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

3.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

7.3

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

3.2%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

2.6%

0.9
2.6
2.3
0.9
0.9
3.8
4.1

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
57.0

WalkScore

0.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

21.3

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Cleveland Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

1.1
1.0
9.7
3.1
2.6
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$69.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

35

COLUMBUS, OH
(Columbus, OH MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 41.3; Rank = 40


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita

Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Columbus, OH MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

1,944,002
24.4%
64.4%
11.2%
49.2%
90.5%
77.3%
14.9%
3.3%
4.5%
3.8%
7.2%
$53,699
10.8%
N/A
11.6%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

36

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 39.7 Rank = 35

Columbus Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

76.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

30.4%
21.3%

82.6%
52.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

25.0%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

19.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

29.2%
9.3%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

13.3%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.8%

Percent
with asthma
28.8%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

36.1%
30.4%

5.1%

9.4%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

19.7%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

190.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 42.9 Rank = 36


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Dog parks/100,000

14.1
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.6%
4.3%
2.5%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
40.0

WalkScore

0.9
1.9
2.3
0.9
0.9
5.2

Park units/10,000
Recreational centers/20,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9
0.4

Park playgrounds/10,000
27.3

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

8.1%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Columbus Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

4.1
0.7
1.0
0.9
3.1
1.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$64.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

37

DALLAS, TX

(Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 42.6; Rank = 38


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MSA
Population
6,700,991
Percent less than 18 years old
27.3%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.3%
Percent 65 years old and older
9.4%
Percent male
49.4%
Percent high school graduate or higher
83.9%
Percent White
69.9%
Percent Black or African American
15.3%
Percent Asian
5.7%
Percent Other Race
9.1%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
28.0%
Percent unemployed
7.6%
Median household income
$56,954
Percent of households below poverty level
11.8%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
344.7
Percent with disability
9.3%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

38

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 46.7 Rank = 27

Dallas Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

73.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

28.3%
21.3%

82.6%
47.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Percent meeting CDC
aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

32.5%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

16.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

33.5%
29.2%
7.9%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

28.5%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

15.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

3.6%

10.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

26.8%

16.7%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

193.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
18.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 38.7 Rank = 40


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Dog parks/100,000

18.0
18.6

1.9

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.5%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.4%

0.9
1.6
2.3
0.5
0.9
2.8

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

WalkScore

0.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

4.6

Percent using public


transportation to work

Swimming pools/100,000
44.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Recreational Facilities

10.6%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dallas Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

4.1
0.7
1.0
1.3
3.1
1.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$70.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

39

DENVER, CO

(Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 71.7; Rank = 4


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of any physical activity or exercise in the last 30 days
Higher percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent obese
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Description of Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO MSA
Population
2,645,209
Percent less than 18 years old
24.4%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.8%
Percent 65 years old and older
10.8%
Percent male
49.8%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.9%
Percent White
82.2%
Percent Black or African American
5.7%
Percent Asian
3.8%
Percent Other Race
8.3%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
22.8%
Percent unemployed
7.5%
Median household income
$61,453
Percent of households below poverty level
9.0%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
337.5
Percent with disability
9.2%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

40

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 77.9 Rank = 5

Denver Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

82.6%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

20.4%
21.3%

82.6%
57.2%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Percent meeting CDC
aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

25.2%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

36.8%
29.2%
9.8%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

15.6%
19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

34.0%
30.4%

31.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

31.3%

17.2%

167.1

7.4%
6.4%
137.1

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease
Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

2.9%

167.1
13.8
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 65.6 Rank = 8


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

6.0%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

9.7

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

Dog parks/100,000
18.6

1.9
1.5
0.9
2.4
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

18.9
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
4.4%

1.1
0.9
4.2

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.5%
2.8%

WalkScore

4.1
1.0
1.0
4.8

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

56.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.4

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Denver Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

2.5
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$146.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

41

DETROIT, MI

(Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 37.3; Rank = 43


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

4,292,060
23.4%
62.6%
13.9%
48.5%
88.3%
70.2%
22.6%
3.4%
3.8%
4.1%
12.2%
$50,310
13.4%
574.4
13.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

42

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 38.4 Rank = 37

Detroit Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


75.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

32.0%
21.3%

82.6%
48.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

19.4%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

36.2%

38.9%

10.4%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

15.3%

4.1%

9.8%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

33.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

28.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

24.0%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

240.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
25.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 36.2 Rank = 43


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Recreational Facilities

6.7%

2.4

Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

6.5
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.6%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.6%

0.0
0.9
3.4

Park playgrounds/10,000

17.9

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

2.3
0.5
0.9
4.3

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000
52.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Detroit Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

0.3
1.0
1.0
3.1
1.3
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$25.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

43

HARTFORD, CT

(Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 63.8; Rank = 12


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer dog parks per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT MSA
Population
1,214,400
Percent less than 18 years old
21.5%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.5%
Percent 65 years old and older
15.0%
Percent male
48.6%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.9%
Percent White
78.2%
Percent Black or African American
10.8%
Percent Asian
4.2%
Percent Other Race
6.8%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
13.2%
Percent unemployed
9.3%
Median household income
$66,732
Percent of households below poverty level
7.7%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
285.8
Percent with disability
10.8%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

44

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 61.9 Rank = 17

Hartford Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


78.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

32.2%

20.3%
23.3%

35.6%

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

38.2%

36.5%

10.3%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

14.1%

61.0%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

35.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

56.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

29.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

4.0%

9.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

21.3%

82.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

27.4%

Percent
obese

15.6%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

178.0

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
12.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 65.7 Rank = 7


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Hartford Target Goal**


Recreational Facilities

19.9%

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

17.7

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

0.0
0.9
2.2
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000
46.1

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

3.4%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

2.9%

4.3%

2.8%

WalkScore

1.6
0.9
4.4
4.1

Park units/10,000
Recreational centers/20,000

1.0
1.0
4.8

Swimming pools/100,000
68.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.7

Ball diamonds/10,000

3.1
2.2
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$37.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

45

HOUSTON, TX

(Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 44.0; Rank = 35


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent with asthma
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA
Population
6,177,035
Percent less than 18 years old
27.4%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.4%
Percent 65 years old and older
9.2%
Percent male
49.7%
Percent high school graduate or higher
81.1%
Percent White
66.2%
Percent Black or African American
17.1%
Percent Asian
6.8%
Percent Other Race
9.9%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
35.9%
Percent unemployed
8.4%
Median household income
$55,910
Percent of households below poverty level
13.0%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
561.5
Percent with disability
9.8%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

46

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 51.8 Rank = 22

Houston Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

73.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

27.0%
21.3%

82.6%
46.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

25.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

19.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

23.3%

33.3%

31.4%

Percent
with asthma

4.9%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

4.2%

6.5%

30.0%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

16.8%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

2.8%
11.4%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

16.0%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

188.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
17.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 36.4 Rank = 42


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Percent using public


transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Dog parks/100,000

22.0
18.6

1.9
0.6
0.9
1.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.8
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.6%

2.3
0.4
0.9
1.9

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

1.7%
2.8%

WalkScore

0.6
1.0
1.8

Swimming pools/100,000
44.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.1

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Recreational Facilities

13.4%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Houston Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$38.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

47

INDIANAPOLIS, IN
(Indianapolis-Carmel, IN MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 32.3; Rank = 47


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
More farmers markets per capita
More golf courses per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Indianapolis-Carmel, IN MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability
48

1,928,982
25.8%
62.8%
11.4%
48.7%
88.9%
76.7%
15.1%
2.1%
6.1%
6.4%
8.6%
$51,808
10.5%
599.5
11.3%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 33.7 Rank = 44

Indianapolis Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

76.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

30.1%
21.3%

82.6%
51.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

24.2%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

17.0%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

9.2%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

13.4%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

38.6%

Percent
with asthma
28.4%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

37.0%

4.4%

9.9%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

21.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

210.1

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
13.4
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 31.0 Rank = 50


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Recreational Facilities

4.8%

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Dog parks/100,000

13.8

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

0.7
1.9
0.5
0.9
1.6

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

18.1

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.2%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.9%

1.6
0.9
2.6

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

0.6
1.0
2.7
3.1

Swimming pools/100,000
29.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Indianapolis Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

1.4
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$36.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

49

JACKSONVILLE, FL
(Jacksonville, FL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 46.6; Rank = 30


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Jacksonville, FL MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

1,377,850
23.2%
63.7%
13.1%
48.7%
88.7%
70.8%
21.1%
3.6%
4.5%
7.4%
11.4%
$48,118
12.1%
513.4
12.9%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

50

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 42.4 Rank = 31

Jacksonville Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


79.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

29.9%
21.3%

82.6%
55.1%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

28.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

17.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

9.6%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

16.6%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

35.0%

Percent
with asthma
28.8%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

37.7%

5.1%

12.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

20.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

203.6

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
25.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 50.7 Rank = 26


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

72.5
18.6

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

WalkScore

1.9
0.1
0.9
3.5

Park playgrounds/10,000
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.3%

2.3
0.4
0.9
5.2

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

1.4
1.0
4.4

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

26.0

2.0
2.0

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Dog parks/100,000

10.9

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

3.5

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

11.0%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Jacksonville Target Goal**

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$4.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

51

KANSAS CITY, MO
(Kansas City, MO-KS MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 45.1; Rank = 34


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
More ball diamonds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Kansas City, MO-KS MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

2,038,724
25.1%
62.2%
12.7%
49.0%
91.2%
79.2%
12.4%
2.4%
6.0%
8.4%
7.8%
$54,519
9.6%
488.2
11.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

52

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 44.5 Rank = 30

Kansas City Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

78.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

28.1%
21.3%

82.6%
54.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

27.5%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

16.7%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

6.5%

24.3%
Percent with angina or
coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

12.6%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

33.8%

9.4%

Percent
with asthma
Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

32.2%

4.4%
2.8%
10.8%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
21.7%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

183.6

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
16.4

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 45.7 Rank = 34


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Dog parks/100,000

36.1
18.6

0.2
0.9
2.1
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000
1.2

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.1%

0.9
4.7

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

1.5%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
32.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9

30.9

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.0

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

8.7%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Kansas City Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

0.4
1.0
2.5
3.1
2.2
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$113.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

53

LAS VEGAS, NV
(Las Vegas-Paradise, NV MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 43.7; Rank = 37


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
More dog parks per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Las Vegas-Paradise, NV MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

2,000,759
24.5%
63.2%
12.3%
50.3%
84.5%
64.5%
10.7%
9.0%
15.8%
29.8%
12.7%
$49,546
12.6%
696.5
11.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

54

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 46.6 Rank = 28

Las Vegas Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


78.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%
Percent in excellent
or very good health

47.1%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

36.0%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

32.2%

18.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
30.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

14.8%

36.5%

7.0%
6.5%
4.5%
2.8%
9.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

25.5%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

28.1%
21.3%

167.1

17.1%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

202.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
10.4
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 40.9 Rank = 38


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Recreational Facilities

4.2%

Ball diamonds/10,000

Dog parks/100,000

5.4
18.6
5.5

Percent using public


transportation to work

3.8%

1.9
4.4
0.9
2.0

Park playgrounds/10,000
Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.3%
2.8%

2.3
0.7
0.9
1.3
4.1
0.8
1.0
2.1

Swimming pools/100,000
39.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.8

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Las Vegas Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.1
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$234.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

55

LOS ANGELES, CA

(Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 53.4; Rank = 19


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent currently smoking
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More recreation centers per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA
Population
13,052,921
Percent less than 18 years old
23.7%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.6%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.7%
Percent male
49.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
78.8%
Percent White
55.9%
Percent Black or African American
6.7%
Percent Asian
15.0%
Percent Other Race
22.4%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
44.9%
Percent unemployed
10.9%
Median household income
$57,271
Percent of households below poverty level
13.7%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
393.0
Percent with disability
9.2%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

56

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 62.7 Rank = 15

Los Angeles Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

74.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

24.7%
21.3%

82.6%
50.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

21.2%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

38.9%

40.2%

23.3%
Percent
with asthma
35.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

18.8%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

6.9%
6.5%
2.9%
2.8%
10.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

30.7%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

11.4%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

182.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.6
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 44.2 Rank = 35


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

14.1%

Ball diamonds/10,000

0.7
1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

11.0
18.6

0.3
0.9
1.0

Park playgrounds/10,000

10.8
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
6.0%

2.3
0.4
0.9
1.4

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.5%
2.8%

WalkScore

1.2
1.0
1.7

Swimming pools/100,000
64.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Los Angeles Target Goal**

3.1
0.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$59.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

57

LOUISVILLE, KY

(Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 25.7; Rank = 49


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
More golf courses per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA
Population
1,251,351
Percent less than 18 years old
23.6%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.0%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.5%
Percent male
48.7%
Percent high school graduate or higher
88.1%
Percent White
81.2%
Percent Black or African American
13.7%
Percent Asian
1.7%
Percent Other Race
3.4%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
4.2%
Percent unemployed
9.0%
Median household income
$48,895
Percent of households below poverty level
11.6%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
425.3
Percent with disability
14.6%
58

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 15.2 Rank = 50

Louisville Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

73.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

32.8%
21.3%

82.6%
45.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

16.3%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

42.8%

37.9%

35.6%

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

12.0%

12.1%

Percent
with asthma
23.6%

6.7%

10.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

23.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

25.9%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

26.1%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

202.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
17.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 36.0 Rank = 44


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dog parks/100,000

18.1
18.6

1.9
0.6
0.9
1.6

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

24.0
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.8%

1.2
0.9
1.7

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
31.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

5.3%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Louisville Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

4.1
0.5
1.0
0.8
3.1
2.4
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$38.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

59

MEMPHIS, TN

(Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 24.8; Rank = 50


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Lower percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
More golf courses per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

60

1,341,690
26.1%
62.8%
11.1%
48.1%
86.2%
48.2%
46.0%
1.9%
3.9%
5.2%
10.9%
$45,687
15.5%
1056.8
12.5%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas.

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 17.2 Rank = 49

Memphis Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


71.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

35.0%
21.3%

82.6%
42.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

19.9%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

12.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

7.7%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

9.4%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

27.5%

Percent
with asthma
19.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

29.4%

7.5%

14.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
23.1%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

247.1

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
31.2
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 32.2 Rank = 47


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

5.1%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

1.7
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

13.5

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.2%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.3%

0.9
1.7
2.3
1.3
0.9
2.9

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

4.1
0.9
1.0
2.7

Swimming pools/100,000
33.0

WalkScore

0.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

11.2

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Memphis Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.2
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$26.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

61

MIAMI, FL

(Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 49.0; Rank = 26


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent currently smoking
Lower percent with asthma
Higher Walk Score
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL MSA
Population
5,762,717
Percent less than 18 years old
21.0%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
62.6%
Percent 65 years old and older
16.4%
Percent male
48.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
84.5%
Percent White
71.8%
Percent Black or African American
21.2%
Percent Asian
2.4%
Percent Other Race
4.6%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
42.0%
Percent unemployed
11.6%
Median household income
$46,648
Percent of households below poverty level
13.9%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
565.2
Percent with disability
10.6%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas.

62

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 60.1 Rank = 18

Miami Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


75.2%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

22.9%
21.3%

82.6%
48.3%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

26.3%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

20.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
31.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

16.5%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

33.8%

33.8%

5.9%
6.5%
4.3%
2.8%
10.3%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

12.3%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

177.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
18.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 38.1 Rank = 41


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Miami Target Goal**


Recreational Facilities

5.2%

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

0.6
1.9
0.7

Dog parks/100,000

2.8

0.9

18.6

1.3

Park playgrounds/10,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

9.5
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
4.2%

0.2
0.9
2.7

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.4%
2.8%

1.5
1.0
3.5

Swimming pools/100,000
76.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.3

3.1
1.3
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$13.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

63

MILWAUKEE, WI

(Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 45.7; Rank = 32


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More golf courses per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI MSA
Population
1,566,981
Percent less than 18 years old
24.2%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
62.7%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.1%
Percent male
48.6%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.9%
Percent White
74.3%
Percent Black or African American
16.6%
Percent Asian
3.0%
Percent Other Race
6.1%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
9.9%
Percent unemployed
8.0%
Median household income
$52,608
Percent of households below poverty level
11.6%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
575.6
Percent with disability
11.7%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

64

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 48.6 Rank = 25

Milwaukee Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


80.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

31.6%
21.3%

82.6%
54.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

29.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

23.3%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

8.3%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

10.0%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.9%

Percent
with asthma
30.0%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

39.9%

4.7%

9.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

20.2%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

197.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
18.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 42.7 Rank = 37


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

9.8%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

1.1

Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

15.9

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

0.5
0.9
1.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

26.8

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
3.7%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.5%

1.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

0.9
1.6

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

0.3
1.0
1.4

Swimming pools/100,000
59.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Milwaukee Target Goal**

3.1
0.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$90.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

65

MINNEAPOLIS, MN

(Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 73.5; Rank = 2


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of any physical activity or exercise in the last 30 days
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent with asthma
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI MSA
Population
3,422,264
Percent less than 18 years old
24.5%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.1%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.4%
Percent male
49.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
93.2%
Percent White
81.2%
Percent Black or African American
7.6%
Percent Asian
6.0%
Percent Other Race
5.2%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
5.5%
Percent unemployed
6.6%
Median household income
$66,282
Percent of households below poverty level
7.4%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
N/A
Percent with disability
9.1%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available

66

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 75.1 Rank = 7

Minneapolis Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

84.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

24.0%
21.3%

82.6%
60.8%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

30.7%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

20.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
30.9%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

13.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

32.4%
30.4%
34.1%
29.2%
8.6%
6.5%
3.2%
2.8%
6.5%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

17.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

118.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
14.5
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 72.0 Rank = 5


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Dog parks/100,000

13.3
18.6

1.6
0.9
2.9

Park playgrounds/10,000
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
4.3%

2.3
1.8
0.9
4.7

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.2%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000

2.6
1.0
1.0
3.1

65.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9

28.3

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

5.1

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

14.6%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Minneapolis Target Goal**

4.7
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$227.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

67

NASHVILLE, TN

(Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 32.5; Rank = 46


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
More farmers markets per capita
More golf courses per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN MSA
Population
1,726,693
Percent less than 18 years old
24.0%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.5%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.5%
Percent male
48.8%
Percent high school graduate or higher
88.2%
Percent White
77.2%
Percent Black or African American
15.6%
Percent Asian
2.4%
Percent Other Race
4.8%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
6.8%
Percent unemployed
7.7%
Median household income
$51,500
Percent of households below poverty level
10.8%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
665.9
Percent with disability
11.4%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

68

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 29.3 Rank = 45

Nashville Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


74.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

29.5%
21.3%

82.6%
50.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

21.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

11.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
19.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

7.6%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

31.3%
30.4%
28.7%
29.2%
6.7%
6.5%
5.2%
2.8%
9.5%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

23.1%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

213.6

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.8
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 35.7 Rank = 45


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Recreational Facilities

3.4%

1.5

Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

17.8

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.1%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.3%

0.5
0.9
2.0
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

13.3

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

1.2
0.9
1.9

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

4.1
0.9
1.0
2.5

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

27.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Nashville Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

2.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$56.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

69

NEW ORLEANS, LA

(New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 42.4; Rank = 39


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent with asthma
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA MSA
Population
1,227,096
Percent less than 18 years old
23.0%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.1%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.8%
Percent male
48.6%
Percent high school graduate or higher
84.8%
Percent White
58.4%
Percent Black or African American
34.5%
Percent Asian
2.8%
Percent Other Race
4.3%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
8.2%
Percent unemployed
9.5%
Median household income
$44,379
Percent of households below poverty level
14.6%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
483.1
Percent with disability
14.0%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

70

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 27.8 Rank = 46

New Orleans Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

73.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

28.9%
21.3%

82.6%
49.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

12.4%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

23.3%

33.2%

32.4%

6.0%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

6.4%

20.7%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

26.4%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

35.6%

7.7%

4.6%

13.0%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

21.9%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

220.6

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
17.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 56.8 Rank = 18


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

25.8%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Ball diamonds/10,000

0.3
1.9

10.6%
84.1

Acres of
parkland/1,000

18.6

Dog parks/100,000

0.3
0.9
2.6
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

12.2

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

2.7%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.5%

2.3
0.9
6.7

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

4.1
0.6
1.0
3.7

Swimming pools/100,000
56.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

New Orleans Target Goal**

3.1
1.5
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$20.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

71

NEW YORK, NY

(New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 51.5; Rank = 24


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More dog parks per capita
More park units per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MSA
Population
19,831,858
Percent less than 18 years old
22.3%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.0%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.6%
Percent male
48.2%
Percent high school graduate or higher
84.8%
Percent White
59.1%
Percent Black or African American
17.4%
Percent Asian
10.3%
Percent Other Race
13.2%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
23.5%
Percent unemployed
9.6%
Median household income
$63,982
Percent of households below poverty level
11.8%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
N/A
Percent with disability
9.7%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

72

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 54.1 Rank = 21

New York Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


22.9%

Percent
obese

74.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

21.3%

82.6%
51.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

25.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

19.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.2%

33.6%

23.3%
Percent
with asthma
32.5%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

14.9%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

8.2%
6.5%
4.2%
2.8%
9.3%
6.4%

19.6%
167.1

14.1%

Percent
currently
smoking

213.4

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

189.0

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

167.1
18.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 48.9 Rank = 28


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.9
1.6

Dog parks/100,000

4.6
18.6

0.9
1.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

16.8
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
31.0%

2.3
0.2
0.9
5.3

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

6.7%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000
88.0

WalkScore

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

19.6%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

New York Target Goal**

4.1
0.1
1.0
0.7
3.1
0.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$162.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

73

OKLAHOMA CITY, OK
(Oklahoma City, OK MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 31.6; Rank = 48


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
More golf courses per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Oklahoma City, OK MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

74

1,296,565
24.8%
62.9%
12.3%
49.3%
87.7%
74.5%
9.9%
3.0%
12.6%
11.9%
5.6%
$48,557
11.9%
548.6
13.3%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 22.8 Rank = 48

Oklahoma City Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

73.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

32.6%
21.3%

82.6%
48.1%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

16.1%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

9.7%

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

37.2%

35.9%

10.3%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

6.4%

4.5%

10.9%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

26.5%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

20.0%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

229.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
26.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 40.3 Rank = 39


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Ball diamonds/10,000

Dog parks/100,000

39.0
18.6

1.9
0.4
0.9
2.0
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

15.4
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
0.4%

1.4
0.9
2.8

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

4.1
0.9
1.0
2.0

Swimming pools/100,000
32.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.6

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

5.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Oklahoma City Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.3
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$61.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

75

ORLANDO, FL

(Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 40.8; Rank = 42


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA
Population
2,223,674
Percent less than 18 years old
22.8%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.2%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.0%
Percent male
49.0%
Percent high school graduate or higher
87.6%
Percent White
71.7%
Percent Black or African American
16.7%
Percent Asian
4.0%
Percent Other Race
7.6%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
26.7%
Percent unemployed
11.4%
Median household income
$46,020
Percent of households below poverty level
13.0%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
546.1
Percent with disability
11.2%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

76

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 34.6 Rank = 42

Orlando Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


75.3%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

29.8%

Percent
obese

21.3%

82.6%
46.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
30.1%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

14.4%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

39.6%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

19.1%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

33.7%
29.2%
8.5%
6.5%
7.4%
2.8%
11.9%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

25.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

16.4%

180.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
24.2

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 47.0 Rank = 32


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dog parks/100,000

12.7
18.6

0.0
0.9
2.2
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

8.5
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.0%

0.4
0.9
5.0
4.1

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

1.8%
2.8%

1.8
1.0
4.7

Swimming pools/100,000
39.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.7
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

5.0%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Orlando Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$110.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

77

PHILADELPHIA, PA

(Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 52.9; Rank = 20


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA
Population
6,018,800
Percent less than 18 years old
22.8%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.4%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.9%
Percent male
48.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.1%
Percent White
68.1%
Percent Black or African American
20.9%
Percent Asian
5.2%
Percent Other Race
5.8%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
8.3%
Percent unemployed
10.4%
Median household income
$60,105
Percent of households below poverty level
9.3%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
N/A
Percent with disability
12.2%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

78

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 47.3 Rank = 26

Philadelphia Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

76.4%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

27.0%
21.3%

82.6%
53.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

35.6%

9.7%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

4.4%

10.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

29.2%

6.5%

Percent
with diabetes

13.0%

35.6%

Percent
with asthma
31.1%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.9%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

28.3%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

19.6%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

199.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
18.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 58.3 Rank = 15


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

12.9%

Dog parks/100,000

7.2
18.6

1.9
0.3
0.9
1.6

Park playgrounds/10,000

19.3
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
9.4%

2.3
0.4
0.9
2.0

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

4.5%
2.8%

WalkScore

2.1
1.0
4.8

Swimming pools/100,000
77.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.7

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Philadelphia Target Goal**

3.1
1.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$46.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

79

PHOENIX, AZ

(Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 44.0; Rank = 36


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good in the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good in the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

4,329,534
25.6%
61.1%
13.2%
49.7%
86.3%
80.4%
5.3%
3.5%
10.8%
29.9%
8.9%
$51,359
12.7%
406.8
10.1%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas.

80

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 56.1 Rank = 20

Phoenix Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


76.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

26.0%
21.3%

82.6%
51.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

25.9%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

22.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

29.2%
9.0%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

19.6%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.4%

Percent
with asthma
31.0%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

37.6%
30.4%

4.0%

10.4%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

16.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

156.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.2
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 32.0 Rank = 49


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Ball diamonds/10,000

Dog parks/100,000

29.5
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.1%
4.3%
2.2%
2.8%

0.9
1.0
2.3
0.6
0.9
1.4
4.1
0.5
1.0
1.8

Swimming pools/100,000
38.0

WalkScore

0.3

Park units/10,000
Recreational centers/20,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9

Park playgrounds/10,000

7.9

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

0.7

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

15.5%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Phoenix Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
0.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$100.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

81

PITTSBURGH, PA
(Pittsburgh, PA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 54.8; Rank = 17


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days where physical health was not good in the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Description of Pittsburgh, PA MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

82

2,360,733
19.6%
62.7%
17.7%
48.5%
92.2%
87.5%
8.3%
1.9%
2.3%
1.4%
7.2%
$50,489
8.6%
N/A
13.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas
This measure was not available.

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 36.2 Rank = 40

Pittsburgh Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


75.4%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%

27.1%
21.3%
52.2%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

17.7%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
30.2%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

11.8%

36.6%
30.4%
34.5%
29.2%
9.2%
6.5%
5.5%
2.8%
11.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

28.5%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

22.2%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

200.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
20.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 73.0 Rank = 4


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

8.8%

Dog parks/100,000

10.1
18.6

1.9
1.3
0.9
4.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

19.9
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
5.5%

2.3
0.3
0.9
5.5

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.7%
2.8%

WalkScore

4.1
1.6
1.0
6.1

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

60.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

4.1

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Pittsburgh Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

2.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$106.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

83

PORTLAND, OR

(Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 72.1; Rank = 3


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of any physical activity or exercise in the last 30 days
Higher percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for diabetes
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Description of Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA MSA
Population
2,289,800
Percent less than 18 years old
23.1%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.6%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.3%
Percent male
49.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
91.4%
Percent White
82.1%
Percent Black or African American
2.8%
Percent Asian
5.9%
Percent Other Race
9.2%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
11.2%
Percent unemployed
9.6%
Median household income
$56,978
Percent of households below poverty level
9.9%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
266.5
Percent with disability
11.8%

84

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 69.5 Rank = 11

Portland Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

84.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

26.0%
21.3%

82.6%
55.1%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

22.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

37.5%

39.2%

23.3%
Percent
with asthma
35.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

20.3%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

9.5%
6.5%
3.7%
2.8%
9.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

30.5%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

15.9%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

149.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
22.0
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 74.6 Rank = 2


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

16.2%

Dog parks/100,000

18.6

1.9
5.7
0.9
2.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

29.3
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
6.0%

1.2
0.9
5.5

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

6.1%
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000
63.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.4

Ball diamonds/10,000

24.6

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Portland Target Goal**

4.1
0.6
1.0
2.3
3.1
2.2
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$151.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

85

PROVIDENCE, RI

(Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 51.6; Rank = 23


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA MSA
Population
1,601,374
Percent less than 18 years old
21.0%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
63.9%
Percent 65 years old and older
15.1%
Percent male
48.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
85.0%
Percent White
84.1%
Percent Black or African American
5.5%
Percent Asian
2.8%
Percent Other Race
7.6%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
10.9%
Percent unemployed
9.8%
Median household income
$54,243
Percent of households below poverty level
9.5%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
339.7
Percent with disability
13.0%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

86

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 45.9 Rank = 29

Providence Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


76.4%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

26.2%
21.3%

82.6%
53.1%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

26.1%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

19.1%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

29.2%
11.3%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

14.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

35.7%

Percent
with asthma
33.8%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

37.5%
30.4%

4.7%

10.7%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
18.5%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

181.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
13.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 57.1 Rank = 16


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Recreational Facilities

9.7%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

2.2
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

6.4
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

2.9%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.5%

3.4
2.3
0.6
0.9
6.4

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

4.1
1.0
1.0
2.2

Swimming pools/100,000
76.0

WalkScore

1.1
0.9

Park playgrounds/10,000
48.7

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Providence Target Goal**

3.1
0.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$71.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

87

RALEIGH, NC
(Raleigh-Cary, NC MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 61.5; Rank = 13


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Description of Raleigh-Cary, NC MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

1,188,564
25.7%
64.5%
9.8%
48.7%
89.9%
70.0%
20.4%
4.6%
5.0%
10.3%
7.5%
$60,319
9.3%
247.0
8.5%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

88

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 67.2 Rank = 13

Raleigh Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


80.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

24.1%

Percent
obese

21.3%

82.6%

59.7%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

25.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
26.9%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.6%

14.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

18.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

34.1%

29.7%
29.2%
7.1%
6.5%
3.0%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

6.4%

8.0%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

15.6%

Percent
currently
smoking

162.3

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
16.4

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 55.9 Rank = 19


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

17.1%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Raleigh Target Goal**

1.9

10.6%

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

1.0%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.5%

0.9
2.2

Park playgrounds/10,000

14.3

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

0.7

Dog parks/100,000

31.0

Acres of
parkland/1,000

2.3
0.0
0.9
5.1

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000

1.7
1.0
2.5
3.1

29.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.5

Ball diamonds/10,000

Tennis courts/10,000

2.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$142.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

89

RICHMOND, VA
(Richmond, VA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 52.3; Rank = 21


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Lower death rate of diabetes
More farmers markets per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Higher percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Higher percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer golf courses per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Richmond, VA MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

1,231,980
22.8%
64.2%
13.0%
48.4%
87.3%
62.5%
30.1%
3.0%
4.4%
5.3%
8.4%
$56,769
8.2%
243.4
11.7%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

90

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 48.7 Rank = 24

Richmond Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


78.1%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

28.4%

Percent
obese

21.3%

82.6%
52.7%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

35.6%

9.0%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

3.7%

10.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

29.2%

6.5%

Percent
with diabetes

10.4%

28.9%

Percent
with asthma
28.2%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

33.0%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

20.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

25.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

19.0%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

188.0

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
10.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 55.8 Rank = 20


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

1.5

Dog parks/100,000

13.7
18.6

0.9
2.8

Park playgrounds/10,000
34.1
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.6%

2.3
0.0
0.9
3.3

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

4.1
1.3
1.0
4.9

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

49.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.6
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

7.3%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Richmond Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

6.6
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$85.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

91

RIVERSIDE, CA

(Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 47.5; Rank = 28


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
More dog parks per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher death rate for diabetes
Fewer farmers markets per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Description of Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA MSA
Population
4,350,096
Percent less than 18 years old
27.8%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
61.2%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.0%
Percent male
49.8%
Percent high school graduate or higher
78.6%
Percent White
64.2%
Percent Black or African American
7.5%
Percent Asian
6.2%
Percent Other Race
22.1%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
48.4%
Percent unemployed
14.2%
Median household income
$51,695
Percent of households below poverty level
15.3%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
368.7
Percent with disability
10.8%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

92

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 49.1 Rank = 23

Riverside Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


73.6%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

30.0%
21.3%

82.6%
50.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

21.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

38.8%
29.2%
8.4%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

18.0%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.6%
30.4%

Percent
with asthma
35.0%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

4.6%

10.8%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

32.3%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

15.6%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

217.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
27.3
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 45.9 Rank = 33


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.5%

1.4
2.3
0.3
0.9
2.1

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

4.1
1.1
1.0
3.4

Swimming pools/100,000
39.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

0.9

Park playgrounds/10,000

10.3

WalkScore

1.3

Dog parks/100,000

15.7

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

1.7
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

9.3%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Riverside Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
0.8
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$125.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

93

SACRAMENTO, CA

(Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 66.9; Rank = 10


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Higher percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Higher percent eating 2+ fruits per day
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Description of Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA MSA
Population
2,196,482
Percent less than 18 years old
24.1%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
62.9%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.0%
Percent male
49.1%
Percent high school graduate or higher
88.0%
Percent White
66.4%
Percent Black or African American
7.1%
Percent Asian
12.6%
Percent Other Race
13.9%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
20.6%
Percent unemployed
13.1%
Median household income
$56,813
Percent of households below poverty level
12.2%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
441.1
Percent with disability
12.0%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

94

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 69.9 Rank = 10

Sacramento Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


80.3%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%

25.8%
21.3%
58.5%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

23.6%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

35.6%

37.2%
29.2%
9.6%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

18.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

40.9%
30.4%

Percent
with asthma
35.9%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

3.9%

10.1%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

33.0%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

15.1%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

177.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
17.3
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 63.9 Rank = 9


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dog parks/100,000

10.9
18.6

1.7
0.9
4.0

Park playgrounds/10,000
26.4
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.3%

2.3
1.3
0.9
4.8

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

4.1%
2.8%

WalkScore

4.1
1.0
1.0
2.6

Swimming pools/100,000
43.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.1
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

8.2%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Sacramento Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$133.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

95

SAINT LOUIS, MO
(Saint Louis, MO-IL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 41.3; Rank = 41


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More farmers markets per capita
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More golf courses per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC activity and strength guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for cardiovascular disease
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Saint Louis, MO-IL MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

2,795,794
23.2%
62.7%
14.1%
48.4%
89.8%
76.5%
18.1%
2.2%
3.2%
2.7%
9.0%
$52,243
10.6%
463.6
12.5%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

96

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 34.4 Rank = 43

Saint Louis Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

74.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

31.8%
21.3%

82.6%
53.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

27.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

15.8%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.5%

32.5%

23.3%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

27.0%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

14.8%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

10.2%

Percent
with asthma

5.9%

11.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
20.0%

Percent
currently
smoking

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

216.2

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
18.5
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 48.1 Rank = 30


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

9.2%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

10.3

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities
1.9
1.4

Dog parks/100,000
18.6

0.9
2.0
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

19.7

1.1

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.3%

0.9
4.0

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.0%
2.8%

0.4
1.0
3.1

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

60.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Saint Louis Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

0.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$55.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

97

SALT LAKE CITY, UT


(Salt Lake City, UT MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 65.7; Rank = 11


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of any physical activity or exercise in the last 30 days
Lower percent currently smoking
Lower percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of Salt Lake City, UT MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

1,123,712
29.1%
61.9%
9.0%
50.3%
89.2%
84.2%
1.7%
3.4%
10.7%
17.0%
7.4%
$60,061
9.5%
327.5
8.9%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

98

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 74.4 Rank = 8

Salt Lake City Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


82.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

82.6%

23.9%
21.3%
55.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
32.5%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

16.5%

37.3%
29.2%
9.4%
6.5%
2.4%
2.8%
7.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

35.1%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

20.4%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

31.0%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

12.3%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

158.8

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
20.7
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 57.1 Rank = 17


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dog parks/100,000

10.8
18.6

3.7
0.9
3.1

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

10.7
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
3.9%

5.3
0.9
6.6

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.9%
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000

4.1
0.5
1.0
1.1
3.1

55.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000
10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

2.9%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Salt Lake City Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.7
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$50.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

99

SAN ANTONIO, TX

(San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 35.6; Rank = 45


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower percent with asthma
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting both CDC activity and strength guidelines
Lower percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent eating 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Lower percent in excellent or very good health
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower percent bicycling or walking to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower park-related expenditures per capita
Description of San Antonio- New Braunfels, TX MSA
Population
2,234,003
Percent less than 18 years old
26.1%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
62.3%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.6%
Percent male
49.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
83.7%
Percent White
77.4%
Percent Black or African American
6.5%
Percent Asian
2.2%
Percent Other Race
13.9%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
54.4%
Percent unemployed
8.0%
Median household income
$51,486
Percent of households below poverty level
13.7%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
390.7
Percent with disability
12.9%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

100

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 39.2 Rank = 36

San Antonio

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


73.9%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

28.9%
21.3%

82.6%
45.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

26.1%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

17.3%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

34.5%

6.4%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

14.5%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

35.3%

Percent
with asthma
27.7%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

3.9%

11.3%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Target Goal*

17.9%

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

184.6

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
20.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 32.1 Rank = 48


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Dog parks/100,000

17.0
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1
2.3%

0.3
0.9
1.3
2.3
0.5
0.9
1.8

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

1.8%
2.8%

WalkScore

4.1
0.6
1.0
1.9

Swimming pools/100,000
34.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9

Park playgrounds/10,000

10.7

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

1.0

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Target Goal**

Recreational Facilities

9.0%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

San Antonio

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$52.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

101

SAN DIEGO, CA

(San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 69.2 Rank = 8


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Higher percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Higher percent consuming 2+ fruits per day
Higher percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Lower percent currently smoking
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More recreation centers per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Description of San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA
Population
3,177,063
Percent less than 18 years old
22.9%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
65.2%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.0%
Percent male
50.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
86.1%
Percent White
70.4%
Percent Black or African American
5.1%
Percent Asian
11.5%
Percent Other Race
13.0%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
32.7%
Percent unemployed
9.6%
Median household income
$60,330
Percent of households below poverty level
11.5%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
373.6
Percent with disability
9.6%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

102

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 79.5 Rank = 4

San Diego

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

77.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

22.7%
21.3%

82.6%
55.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

33.1%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

24.4%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

37.3%

7.0%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

20.0%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

32.1%

Percent
with asthma
36.9%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

3.7%

9.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Target Goal*

167.1

9.5%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

162.3

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
19.1
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 59.1 Rank = 14


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Dog parks/100,000

35.9
18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

2.8%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.4%

1.8
2.3
0.6
0.9
3.4

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000
2.8%

WalkScore

1.2
0.9

Park playgrounds/10,000

15.7

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Swimming pools/100,000
49.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

2.2
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Target Goal**

Recreational Facilities
22.6%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

San Diego

Tennis courts/10,000

4.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
3.1
1.4
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$106.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

103

SAN FRANCISCO, CA

(San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 71.0; Rank = 5


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Higher percent meeting both CDC aerobic and strength activity guidelines
Higher percent eating 2+ fruits per day
Lower percent currently smoking
Lower percent obese
Lower percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More dog parks per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Description of San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA MSA
Population
4,455,560
Percent less than 18 years old
20.8%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
65.9%
Percent 65 years old and older
13.3%
Percent male
49.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
87.9%
Percent White
54.4%
Percent Black or African American
7.9%
Percent Asian
23.7%
Percent Other Race
14.0%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
21.9%
Percent unemployed
8.8%
Median household income
$74,922
Percent of households below poverty level
8.2%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
550.8
Percent with disability
9.3%

104

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 80.6 Rank = 2

San Francisco

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

79.2%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

20.6%
21.3%

82.6%
58.4%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

34.8%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

24.5%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
36.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

19.5%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

36.7%

36.3%

11.6%
6.5%
2.3%
2.8%
9.3%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Target Goal*

167.1

10.3%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

146.7

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
15.6
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 61.5 Rank = 12


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Target Goal**

Recreational Facilities

18.0%

Ball diamonds/10,000

0.8
1.9

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

6.6
18.6

3.3
0.9
1.6

Park playgrounds/10,000

28.5
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
15.6%

2.3
0.7
0.9
2.8

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

6.1%
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000
84.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

San Francisco

4.1
0.6
1.0
1.1
3.1
1.9
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$263.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

105

SAN JOSE, CA

(San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 69.4; Rank = 6


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Higher percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Lower percent currently smoking
Lower percent obese
Higher percent in excellent or very good health
Lower percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More recreation centers per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher death rate for diabetes
Fewer ball diamonds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Fewer park units per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Description of San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA MSA
Population
1,894,388
Percent less than 18 years old
23.8%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.7%
Percent 65 years old and older
11.6%
Percent male
50.3%
Percent high school graduate or higher
85.9%
Percent White
51.3%
Percent Black or African American
2.6%
Percent Asian
32.2%
Percent Other Race
13.9%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
27.8%
Percent unemployed
8.8%
Median household income
$90,737
Percent of households below poverty level
7.6%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
274.0
Percent with disability
7.8%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

106

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 85.4 Rank = 1

San Jose Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

79.2%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

16.4%
21.3%

82.6%
61.2%

Percent in excellent
or very good health
Any days when physical
health was not good
during the past 30 days

32.2%

23.3%

Percent
with asthma
35.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

21.7%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

29.2%
30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

20.4%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

35.1%
29.2%
9.2%
6.5%
2.9%
2.8%
7.2%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

36.2%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

8.9%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

138.1

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
20.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 53.7 Rank = 24


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

Recreational Facilities

14.3%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Ball diamonds/10,000

0.5
1.9

10.6%

18.6

Golf courses/100,000

13.1

Percent using public


transportation to work

3.4%

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.5%

0.9
2.7
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

20.6

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

0.9

Dog parks/100,000

16.5

Acres of
parkland/1,000

0.3
0.9
2.7

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000
48.0
51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

San Jose Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

1.1
1.0
0.6
3.1
1.0
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$118.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

107

SEATTLE, WA

(Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 69.3; Rank = 7


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Higher percent of any physical activity or exercise in the last 30 days
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More dog parks per capita
More park units per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Higher level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Description of Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA MSA
Population
Percent less than 18 years old
Percent 18 to 64 years old
Percent 65 years old and older
Percent male
Percent high school graduate or higher
Percent White
Percent Black or African American
Percent Asian
Percent Other Race
Percent Hispanic/Latino
Percent unemployed
Median household income
Percent of households below poverty level
Violent crime rate/100,000*
Percent with disability

3,552,157
22.3%
66.1%
11.6%
49.8%
91.8%
72.5%
5.6%
11.6%
10.3%
9.3%
7.6%
$65,677
7.8%
336.8
10.4%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends


that these rates not be compared across areas

108

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 68.9 Rank = 12

Seattle Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


84.2%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

24.6%
21.3%

82.6%
54.9%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

19.3%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

Percent
with asthma
32.6%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

17.1%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

37.6%

39.9%

8.9%
6.5%
3.2%
2.8%
8.0%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

31.7%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

16.1%

162.0

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

167.1
19.5
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 69.8 Rank = 6


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

10.3%

Dog parks/100,000

9.0
18.6

1.8
0.9
2.1
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

17.7
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
8.5%

0.8
0.9
7.0

Park units/10,000

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

4.8%
2.8%

WalkScore

Swimming pools/100,000

4.1
0.8
1.0
1.6
3.1

71.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.8
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work

Seattle Target Goal**

2.7
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
3.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$255.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

109

TAMPA, FL

(Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 46.0; Rank = 31


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
More ball diamonds per capita
More dog parks per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent of days when physical health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent of days when mental health was not good during the past 30 days
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Higher death rate for diabetes
Lower percent of city land area as parkland
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Fewer tennis courts per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL MSA
Population
2,842,878
Percent less than 18 years old
20.7%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
61.3%
Percent 65 years old and older
18.0%
Percent male
48.5%
Percent high school graduate or higher
88.3%
Percent White
79.7%
Percent Black or African American
11.9%
Percent Asian
3.0%
Percent Other Race
5.4%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
17.0%
Percent unemployed
10.9%
Median household income
$44,402
Percent of households below poverty level
12.0%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
409.3
Percent with disability
14.2%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

110

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 36.9 Rank = 39

Tampa Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


Percent
obese

74.7%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

26.8%
21.3%

82.6%
49.6%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

61.0%

27.6%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

32.2%

18.9%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

39.0%

35.9%

23.3%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

31.5%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

13.8%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

8.9%

Percent
with asthma

6.4%

12.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0
167.1

20.1%

Percent
currently
smoking

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

181.5

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
24.6
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 54.9 Rank = 21.5


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Dog parks/100,000

10.0
18.6

1.9
2.6
0.9
2.4
2.3

Park playgrounds/10,000

11.3
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.2%

0.9
0.9
5.4

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

2.5%
2.8%

1.5
1.0
3.8

Swimming pools/100,000
46.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

3.1

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

4.8%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Tampa Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.1
1.4
2.0

Park-related Expenditures

1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$101.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

111

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

(Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 52.0; Rank = 22


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More acres of parkland per capita
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
More ball diamonds per capita
More park playgrounds per capita
More golf courses per capita
More park units per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Lower percent meeting CDC aerobic activity guidelines
Lower percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day
Higher percent currently smoking
Higher percent obese
Higher percent with angina or coronary heart disease
Higher percent with diabetes
Lower percent using public transportation to work
Lower Walk Score
Fewer dog parks per capita
Fewer recreation centers per capita
Fewer swimming pools per capita
Lower level of state requirement for Physical Education classes
Description of Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA
Population
1,699,925
Percent less than 18 years old
22.9%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
64.9%
Percent 65 years old and older
12.2%
Percent male
49.1%
Percent high school graduate or higher
89.9%
Percent White
60.2%
Percent Black or African American
30.9%
Percent Asian
3.7%
Percent Other Race
5.2%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
5.8%
Percent unemployed
8.9%
Median household income
$55,997
Percent of households below poverty level
10.4%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
300.8
Percent with disability
10.6%
*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

112

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 42.1 Rank = 32

Virginia Beach Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


30.2%

Percent
obese

78.8%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

21.3%

82.6%

51.0%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

20.1%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

34.5%

32.6%

7.8%

Percent
with asthma

6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

28.5%
35.6%

Percent
with diabetes

13.1%

4.4%

11.6%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

23.3%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

61.0%

25.4%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

20.6%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

196.4

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
16.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 61.8 Rank = 11


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment

58.4
18.6

Dog parks/100,000

0.5
0.9
5.0

Park playgrounds/10,000
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
1.9%

2.3
1.2
0.9
6.5

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

3.1%
2.8%

Swimming pools/100,000

0.3
1.0
1.4
3.1

31.0

WalkScore

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

1.9

14.7

Farmers markets/
1,000,000

Percent bicycling
or walking to work

3.2

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%

Acres of
parkland/1,000

Percent using public


transportation to work

Recreational Facilities

15.9%

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

Virginia Beach Target Goal**

Tennis courts/10,000

3.7
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
1.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$146.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

113

WASHINGTON, DC

(Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA)

Ranking: Total Score = 77.3; Rank = 1


Areas of Excellence (at or better than target goal):
Lower death rate for cardiovascular disease
Lower death rate for diabetes
Higher percent of city land area as parkland
More farmers markets per capita
Higher percent using public transportation to work
Higher percent bicycling or walking to work
Higher Walk Score
More dog parks per capita
More park units per capita
More recreation centers per capita
More swimming pools per capita
More tennis courts per capita
Higher park-related expenditures per capita
Improvement Priority Areas (worse than 20% of target goal):
Higher percent with asthma
Higher percent with diabetes
Fewer acres of parkland per capita
Fewer park playgrounds per capita
Fewer golf courses per capita
Description of Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA
Population
5,860,342
Percent less than 18 years old
23.4%
Percent 18 to 64 years old
66.0%
Percent 65 years old and older
10.6%
Percent male
48.7%
Percent high school graduate or higher
90.1%
Percent White
55.6%
Percent Black or African American
25.3%
Percent Asian
9.5%
Percent Other Race
9.6%
Percent Hispanic/Latino
14.5%
Percent unemployed
6.6%
Median household income
$88,233
Percent of households below poverty level
5.7%
Violent crime rate/100,000*
332.7
Percent with disability
7.8%

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends
that these rates not be compared across areas

114

ACSM American Fitness Index Components


Personal Health Indicators Score = 79.9 Rank = 3

Washington, DC Target Goal*

Health Behaviors

Chronic Health Problems


81.0%

Percent any physical


activity or exercise in
the last 30 days

Percent
obese

24.1%
21.3%

82.6%
58.7%

Percent in excellent
or very good health

32.2%

22.3%

Percent meeting both


CDC aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

23.3%

Any days when physical


health was not good
during the past 30 days

30.4%

Any days when mental


health was not good
during the past 30 days

29.2%

35.6%

30.4%

8.6%
6.5%

Percent with angina or


coronary heart disease

2.8%

Percent
with diabetes

16.3%

Percent consuming 3+
vegetables per day

32.8%

Percent
with asthma
34.1%

Percent consuming
2+ fruits per day

3.2%

8.5%
6.4%

19.6%
189.0

Percent
currently
smoking

61.0%

27.9%

Percent meeting CDC


aerobic activity guidelines

167.1

13.2%

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

13.1%

164.9

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

167.1
16.9
17.0

Community/Environmental Indicators Score = 74.9 Rank = 1


(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)
Built Environment
Parkland as a percent
of city land area
Acres of
parkland/1,000
Farmers markets/
1,000,000
Percent using public
transportation to work
Percent bicycling
or walking to work

Recreational Facilities

19.5%

1.7
1.9

Ball diamonds/10,000

10.6%
Dog parks/100,000

12.8
18.6

1.2
0.9
1.7

Park playgrounds/10,000
28.5
Golf courses/100,000

13.1
14.1%

2.3
0.5
0.9
5.3

Park units/10,000

4.1

4.3%
Recreational centers/20,000

4.0%
2.8%

WalkScore

2.2
1.0
6.0

Swimming pools/100,000

3.1

74.0
Tennis courts/10,000

51.1

Policy for School P.E.


Level of state
requirement for
Physical Education

Washington, DC Target Goal**

3.5
2.0

Park-related Expenditures
2.0
2.5

Total park
expenditure
per resident

$398.00
$101.80

*The target goal for the Personal Health Indicators that did not change was the 90th percentile for MSAs during 2008-2012. For the new personal health indicators the target goals were 90% of the 2014 values.
**The target goal for the Community/Environmental Indicators that did not change was the MSA average for 2008 to 2012. New community indicators target goals were an average of the 2014 values.

115

Appendix A Data Sources


Variable

Data Source

Web Site

Population Estimate

2012 U.S. Census http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/


totals/2012/index.html

Age Groups
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent male
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent high school
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/
graduate or higher
Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent in each race groups U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year
pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent Hispanic/Latino
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent unemployed
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Median household income U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent of households
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/
below poverty level
Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Violent crime rate/100,000 2012 FBI Uniform Crime

Reporting Program

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-inthe-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/violentcrime/violent-crime

Percent with disability


U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/

Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent any physical
2012 CDC BRFSS
activity or exercising in
the last 30 days

116

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Appendix A Data Sources


Variable

Data Source

Web Site

Percent meeting CDC


2011 CDC BRFSS
aerobic activity guidelines

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2011.htm

Percent meeting CDC


2011 CDC BRFSS
aerobic and strength
activity guidelines

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2011.htm

Percent eating 2+ fruits


2011 CDC BRFSS
per day

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data
/annual_2011.htm

Percent eating 3+
2011 CDC BRFSS
vegetables per day

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2011.htm

Percent currently smoking

2012 CDC BRFSS http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/


annual_2012.html

Percent obese

2012 CDC BRFSS http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/


annual_2012.html

Percent in excellent
2012 CDC BRFSS
or very good health

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html

Any days when physical


2012 CDC BRFSS
health, was not good
during the past 30 days

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html

Any days when mental


2012 CDC BRFSS
http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
health, was not good
annual_2012.html
during the past 30 days

Percent with asthma
2012 CDC BRFSS http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html
Percent with angina or
2012 CDC BRFSS
coronary heart disease

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html

Percent with diabetes


2012 CDC BRFSS

http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/
annual_2012.html

Death rate/100,000 for


cardiovascular disease

2010 CDC Wonder

http://wonder.cdc.gov

Death rate/100,000
for diabetes

2010 CDC Wonder

http://wonder.cdc.gov

Parkland as a percent
of city land area

2012 City Park Facts


The Trust for Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

117

Appendix A Data Sources


Variable

Data Source

Web Site

Acres of parkland/1,000

2012 City Park Facts


The Trust for Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Farmers markets/1,000,000 2013 USDA Farmers Markets http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/



farmersmarkets
Percent using public
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/
transportation to work
Community Survey 1 Year pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Percent bicycling or
U.S. Census 2012 American http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/
walking to work
Community Survey 1 Year
pages/index.xhtml
Estimates
Walk Score
2014 Walk Score

http://www.walkscore.com/cities-andneighborhoods/

Ball diamonds/10,000

2012 The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Dog parks/100,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Park playgrounds/10,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Golf courses/100,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Park units/10,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Recreation centers/20,000 2012The Trust for



Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Swimming pools/100,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Tennis courts/10,000

2012The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Park-related expenditures
per capita

2012 The Trust for


Public Land

http://www.tpl.org/

Level of state requirement 2012 School Health Policies http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/shpps/2012/


for Physical Education
and Programs Study
data/physical_education/index.htm
classes

118

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Appendix B Members of the Expert Panel


AFI Advisory Board Members
Barbara E. Ainsworth, Ph.D., M.P.H., FACSM, FNAK
Arizona State University
Mesa, Arizona

Roseann M. Lyle, Ph.D., R.D., FACSM


Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana

Steven N. Blair, P.E.D, FACSM


University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina

Melinda M. Manore, Ph.D., R.D., FACSM


Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon

Jacqueline Epping, M.Ed., FACSM


U.S. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC)
Atlanta, Georgia

Kenneth E. Powell, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM


Epidemiologic and Public Health Consultant
Atlanta, Georgia

John M. Jakicic, Ph.D., FACSM


University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Liz Joy, M.D., M.P.H., FACSM
Intermountain Healthcare/
University of Utah School of Medicine
NiCole Keith, Ph.D., FACSM
Indiana University/Regenstrief Institute, Inc.
Indianapolis, Indiana

Angela Smith, M.D., FACSM


Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children
Walter R. Thompson, Ph.D., FACSM
Georgia State University
Atlanta, Georgia
Stella Lucia Volpe, Ph.D., R.D., FACSM
Drexel University
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

119

Appendix B Members of the Expert Panel


Additional Members for AFI Expert Panel
Ross Andersen, Ph.D., FACSM
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Caroline A. Macera, Ph.D., FACSM


San Diego State University
San Diego, California

Laura Brennan Ramirez, Ph.D., MPH


Transtria LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

Robert H. McNulty, J.D.


Partners for Livable Communities
Washington, DC

Natalie Colabianchi, Ph.D.


University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina

Marcia G. Ory, Ph.D., M.P.H.


Texas A & M Health Science Center
College Station, Texas

Karen J. Coleman, Ph.D.


Southern California Permanente
Medical Group
Pasadena, California

Nico Pronk, Ph.D., FACSM


HealthPartners
Minneapolis, Minnesota

Kelly Evenson, Ph.D., FACSM


University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Sandra Ham, M.S.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC)
Atlanta, Georgia
Christine Hoehner, Ph.D., M.S.P.H.
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, Missouri
Laura Kettel Khan, Ph.D.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC)
Atlanta, Georgia

Robert Sallis, M.D., FACSM


Kaiser Permanente
Rancho Cucamonga, California
Patricia Sharpe, Ph.D., M.P.H.
University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina
David Williams, Ph.D.
Brown Medical School and
the Miriam Hospital
Providence, Rhode Island
Wes Wong, M.D., M.M.M.
Community Health Network
Indianapolis, Indiana

Harold W. (Bill) Kohl, Ph.D., FACSM


University of Texas
Austin, Texas

120

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Appendix C U.S. Values, MSA Averages and MSA


Ranges for AFI Indicators

U.S. Value

MSA Average

MSA Range

313,914,040

3,423,902

1,123,712 19,831,858

Percent less than 18 years old

23.5%

23.8%

19.6% 29.1%

Percent 18 to 64 years old

62.8%

63.6%

61.1% 66.4%

Percent 65 years old and older

13.7%

12.6%

8.7% 18.0%

Percent male

42.9%

49.0%

48.1% 50.3%

Percent high school graduate or higher

86.4%

87.7%

78.6% 93.2%

Percent White

73.9%

71.0%

48.2% 87.5%

Percent Black or African American

12.6%

15.3%

1.7% 46.0%

Percent Asian

5.0%

5.7%

1.4% 32.2%

Percent Other Race

8.5%

8.0%

2.3% 22.4%

Percent Hispanic/Latino

16.9%

16.1%

1.4% 54.4%

Percent unemployed

9.4%

9.2%

5.6% 14.2%

$51,371

$56,493

$44,379 $90,737

Percent of households below poverty level

11.8%

11.0%

5.7% 15.5%

Violent crime rate/100,000*

386.9

445.3

243.4 1056.8

Percent with disability

12.2%

11.2%

7.8% 14.6%

Population

Median household income

*Due to differences in jurisdictional definitions and reporting, the FBI recommends that these rates not be compared across areas

ACSM American Fitness IndexTM Components


Personal Health Indicators

U.S. Value

MSA Average

MSA Range

Health Behaviors
 ercent any physical activity or
P
exercise in the last 30 days

77.1%

77.4%

71.7% 84.7%

28.0%

27.8%

19.9% 36.2%

 ercent meeting both CDC aerobic


P
and strength activity guidelines

20.1%

19.4%

11.6% 25.2%

Percent consuming 2+ fruits per day

30.0%

30.0%

18.3% 36.9%

Percent consuming 3+ vegetables per day

15.0%

14.8%

7.6% 21.7%

Percent currently smoking

19.6%

17.8%

8.9% 26.1%

Percent meeting CDC aerobic


activity guidelines

Chronic Health Problems


Percent obese

27.6%

27.3%

16.4% 35.0%

Percent in excellent or very good health

52.2%

52.4%

42.6% 61.2%

 ny days when physical health was


A
not good during the past 30 days

35.8%

35.6%

29.2% 42.8%

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

121

Appendix C U.S. Values, MSA Averages and MSA


Ranges for AFI Indicators

U.S. Value

MSA Average

MSA Range

Chronic Health Problems (cont.)


Any days when mental health was
 ot good during the past 30 days
n

35.4%

35.1%

27.5% 40.2%

Percent with asthma

8.9%

8.8%

4.9% 12.1%

 ercent with angina or coronary


P
heart disease

4.3%

4.3%

2.3% 7.5%

Percent with diabetes

9.7%

10.1%

6.5% 14.0%

 eath rate/100,000 for


D
cardiovascular disease

194.2

187.5

118.8 247.1

Death rate/100,000 for diabetes

20.8

18.7

10.4 31.2

Community/Environmental Indicators
(note: most of these data were available only for the main city in the MSA)

MSA Average+ Range of All Cities

Built Environment
Parkland as percent of city land area

10.6%

2.5% 25.8%

Acres of parkland/1,000

18.3%

2.8 84.1

Farmers markets/1,000,000

19.3%

2.8 48.7

Percent using public transportation to work

4.3%

0.4% 31.0%

Percent bicycling or walking to work

2.9%

1.1% 6.7%

Walk Score

51.1%

24.4% 87.6

Recreational Facilities
Ball diamonds/10,000

1.9

0.3 5.1

Dog parks/10,000

1.0

0.0 5.7

Park playgrounds/10,000

2.3

1.0 5.0

Golf courses/100,000

0.9

0.0 5.3

Park units/10,000

4.2

1.3 10.9

Recreation centers/20,000

1.0

0.0 2.6

Swimming pools/100,000

3.0

0.5 9.7

Tennis courts/10,000

2.1

0.8 6.6

$99.5

$1.0 $398.0

1.4

03

Park-related expenditures per capita


Level of state requirement for Physical Education classes**

**3 = required at three levels: high school, middle school and elementary school; 2= required at two levels; 1= required at only one level
+Averages were calculated from 2014 data and may differ from the community/environmental indicator target goal values.

122

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Appendix D Counties in MSAs


Atlanta-Sandy SpringsMarietta, GA
Barrow County, GA
Bartow County, GA
Butts County, GA
Carroll County, GA
Cherokee County, GA
Clayton County, GA
Cobb County, GA
Coweta County, GA
Dawson County, GA
DeKalb County, GA
Douglas County, GA
Fayette County, GA
Forsyth County, GA
Fulton County, GA
Gwinnett County, GA
Haralson County, GA
Heard County, GA
Henry County, GA
Jasper County, GA
Lamar County, GA
Meriwether County, GA
Newton County, GA
Paulding County, GA
Pickens County, GA
Pike County, GA
Rockdale County, GA
Spalding County, GA
Walton County, GA
Austin-Round RockSan Marcos, TX
Bastrop County, TX
Caldwell County, TX
Hays County, TX
Travis County, TX
Williamson County, TX
Baltimore-Towson, MD
Anne Arundel County, MD
Baltimore County, MD
Carroll County, MD
Harford County, MD
Howard County, MD
Queen Annes County, MD
Baltimore city, MD

Birmingham-Hoover, AL
Bibb County, AL
Blount County, AL
Chilton County, AL
Jefferson County, AL
St. Clair County, AL
Shelby County, AL
Walker County, AL
Boston-CambridgeQuincy, MA-NH
Norfolk County, MA
Plymouth County, MA
Suffolk County, MA
Middlesex County, MA
Essex County, MA
Rockingham County, NH
Strafford County, NH
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
Erie County, NY
Niagara County, NY
Charlotte-GastoniaRock Hill, NC-SC
Anson County, NC
Cabarrus County, NC
Gaston County, NC
Mecklenburg County, NC
Union County, NC
York County, SC
Chicago-JoiletNaperville, IL-IN-WI
Cook County, IL
DeKalb County, IL
DuPage County, IL
Grundy County, IL
Kane County, IL
Kendall County, IL
McHenry County, IL
Will County, IL
Jasper County, IN
Lake County, IN
Newton County, IN
Porter County, IN
Lake County, IL
Kenosha County, WI

Cincinnati-Middletown,
OH-KY-IN
Dearborn County, IN
Franklin County, IN
Ohio County, IN
Boone County, KY
Bracken County, KY
Campbell County, KY
Gallatin County, KY
Grant County, KY
Kenton County, KY
Pendleton County, KY
Brown County, OH
Butler County, OH
Clermont County, OH
Hamilton County, OH
Warren County, OH
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
Cuyahoga County, OH
Geauga County, OH
Lake County, OH
Lorain County, OH
Medina County, OH
Columbus, OH
Delaware County, OH
Fairfield County, OH
Franklin County, OH
Licking County, OH
Madison County, OH
Morrow County, OH
Pickaway County, OH
Union County, OH
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
Collin County, TX
Dallas County, TX
Delta County, TX
Denton County, TX
Ellis County, TX
Hunt County, TX
Kaufman County, TX
Rockwall County, TX
Johnson County, TX
Parker County, TX
Tarrant County, TX
Wise County, TX

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

123

Appendix D Counties in MSAs


Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO
Adams County, CO
Arapahoe County, CO
Broomfield County, CO
Clear Creek County, CO
Denver County, CO
Douglas County, CO
Elbert County, CO
Gilpin County, CO
Jefferson County, CO
Park County, CO
Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
Wayne County, MI
Lapeer County, MI
Livingston County, MI
Macomb County, MI
Oakland County, MI
St. Clair County, MI
Hartford-West HartfordEast Hartford, CT
Hartford County, CT
Middlesex County, CT
Tolland County, CT
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX
Austin County, TX
Brazoria County, TX
Chambers County, TX
Fort Bend County, TX
Galveston County, TX
Harris County, TX
Liberty County, TX
Montgomery County, TX
San Jacinto County, TX
Waller County, TX
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN
Boone County, IN
Brown County, IN
Hamilton County, IN
Hancock County, IN
Hendricks County, IN
Johnson County, IN
Marion County, IN
Morgan County, IN
Putnam County, IN
Shelby County, IN

124

Jacksonville, FL
Baker County, FL
Clay County, FL
Duval County, FL
Nassau County, FL
St. Johns County, FL
Kansas City, MO-KS
Franklin County, KS
Johnson County, KS
Leavenworth County, KS
Linn County, KS
Miami County, KS
Wyandotte County, KS
Bates County, MO
Caldwell County, MO
Cass County, MO
Clay County, MO
Clinton County, MO
Jackson County, MO
Lafayette County, MO
Platte County, MO
Ray County, MO
Las Vegas-Paradise, NV
Clark County, NV
Los Angeles-Long BeachSanta Ana, CA
Los Angeles County, CA
Orange County, CA
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN
Clark County, IN
Floyd County, IN
Harrison County, IN
Washington County, IN
Bullitt County, KY
Henry County, KY
Jefferson County, KY
Meade County, KY
Nelson County, KY
Oldham County, KY
Shelby County, KY
Spencer County, KY
Trimble County, KY

Memphis, TN-MS-AR
Crittenden County, AR
DeSoto County, MS
Marshall County, MS
Tate County, MS
Tunica County, MS
Fayette County, TN
Shelby County, TN
Tipton County, TN
Miami-Fort LauderdalePompano Beach, FL
Broward County, FL
Miami-Dade County, FL
Palm Beach County, FL
Milwaukee-WaukeshaWest Allis, WI
Milwaukee County, WI
Ozaukee County, WI
Washington County, WI
Waukesha County, WI
Minneapolis-St. PaulBloomington, MN-WI
Anoka County, MN
Carver County, MN
Chisago County, MN
Dakota County, MN
Hennepin County, MN
Isanti County, MN
Ramsey County, MN
Scott County, MN
Sherburne County, MN
Washington County, MN
Wright County, MN
Pierce County, WI
St. Croix County, WI

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Appendix D Counties in MSAs


Nashville-DavidsonMurfreesboro-Franklin, TN
Cannon County, TN
Cheatham County, TN
Davidson County, TN
Dickson County, TN
Hickman County, TN
Macon County, TN
Robertson County, TN
Rutherford County, TN
Smith County, TN
Sumner County, TN
Trousdale County, TN
Williamson County, TN
Wilson County, TN

Oklahoma City, OK
Canadian County, OK
Cleveland County, OK
Grady County, OK
Lincoln County, OK
Logan County, OK
McClain County, OK
Oklahoma County, OK

New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA
Jefferson Parish, LA
Orleans Parish, LA
Plaquemines Parish, LA
St. Bernard Parish, LA
St. Charles Parish, LA
St. John the Baptist Parish, LA
St. Tammany Parish, LA

Philadelphia-CamdenWilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Burlington County, NJ
Camden County, NJ
Gloucester County, NJ
Bucks County, PA
Chester County, PA
Delaware County, PA
Montgomery County, PA
Philadelphia County, PA
New Castle County, DE
Cecil County, MD
Salem County, NJ

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-PA


Middlesex County, NJ
Monmouth County, NJ
Ocean County, NJ
Somerset County, NJ
Nassau County, NY
Suffolk County, NY
Essex County, NJ
Hunterdon County, NJ
Morris County, NJ
Sussex County, NJ
Union County, NJ
Pike County, PA
Bergen County, NJ
Hudson County, NJ
Passaic County, NJ
Bronx County, NY
Kings County, NY
New York County, NY
Putnam County, NY
Queens County, NY
Richmond County, NY
Rockland County, NY
Westchester County, NY

Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL
Lake County, FL
Orange County, FL
Osceola County, FL
Seminole County, FL

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ
Maricopa County, AZ
Pinal County, AZ
Pittsburgh, PA
Allegheny County, PA
Armstrong County, PA
Beaver County, PA
Butler County, PA
Fayette County, PA
Washington County, PA
Westmoreland County, PA

Portland-VancouverHillsboro, OR-WA
Clackamas County, OR
Columbia County, OR
Multnomah County, OR
Washington County, OR
Yamhill County, OR
Clark County, WA
Skamania County, WA
Providence-New BedfordFall River, RI-MA
Bristol County, MA
Bristol County, RI
Kent County, RI
Newport County, RI
Providence County, RI
Washington County, RI
Raleigh-Cary, NC
Franklin County, NC
Johnston County, NC
Wake County, NC
Richmond, VA
Amelia County, VA
Caroline County, VA
Charles City County, VA
Chesterfield County, VA
Cumberland County, VA
Dinwiddie County, VA
Goochland County, VA
Hanover County, VA
Henrico County, VA
King and Queen County, VA
King William County, VA
Louisa County, VA
New Kent County, VA
Powhatan County, VA
Prince George County, VA
Sussex County, VA
Colonial Heights city, VA
Hopewell city, VA
Petersburg city, VA
Richmond city, VA

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

125

Appendix D Counties in MSAs


Riverside-San
Bernardino-Ontario, CA
Riverside County, CA
San Bernardino County, CA
Sacramento-ArdenArcade-Roseville, CA
El Dorado County, CA
Placer County, CA
Sacramento County, CA
Yolo County, CA
Saint Louis, MO-IL
Bond County, IL
Calhoun County, IL
Clinton County, IL
Jersey County, IL
Macoupin County, IL
Madison County, IL
Monroe County, IL
St. Clair County, IL
Crawford County, MO (pt.)*
Franklin County, MO
Jefferson County, MO
Lincoln County, MO
St. Charles County, MO
St. Louis County, MO
Warren County, MO
Washington County, MO
St. Louis city, MO
Salt Lake City, UT
Salt Lake County, UT
Summit County, UT
Tooele County, UT

San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX


Atascosa County, TX
Bandera County, TX
Bexar County, TX
Comal County, TX
Guadalupe County, TX
Kendall County, TX
Medina County, TX
Wilson County, TX
San Diego-CarlsbadSan Marcos, CA
San Diego County, CA
San Francisco-OaklandFremont, CA
Alameda County, CA
Contra Costa County, CA
Marin County, CA
San Francisco County, CA
San Mateo County, CA
San Jose-SunnyvaleSanta Clara, CA
San Benito County, CA
Santa Clara County, CA
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
King County, WA
Snohomish County, WA
Pierce County, WA
Tampa-St. PetersburgClearwater, FL
Hernando County, FL
Hillsborough County, FL
Pasco County, FL
Pinellas County, FL

Virginia Beach-NorfolkNewport News, VA-NC


Currituck County, NC
Gloucester County, VA
Isle of Wight County, VA
James City County, VA
Mathews County, VA
Surry County, VA
York County, VA
Chesapeake city, VA
Hampton city, VA
Newport News city, VA
Norfolk city, VA
Poquoson city, VA
Portsmouth city, VA
Suffolk city, VA
Virginia Beach city, VA
Williamsburg city, VA
Washington-ArlingtonAlexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
Frederick County, MD
Montgomery County, MD
District of Columbia, DC
Calvert County, MD
Charles County, MD
Prince Georges County, MD
Arlington County, VA
Clarke County, VA
Fairfax County, VA
Fauquier County, VA
Loudoun County, VA
Prince William County, VA
Spotsylvania County, VA
Stafford County, VA
Warren County, VA
Alexandria city, VA
Fairfax city, VA
Falls Church city, VA
Fredericksburg city, VA
Manassas city, VA
Manassas Park city, VA
Jefferson County, WV

* The portion of Sullivan city in Crawford


County, Missouri, is legally part of the St.
Louis, MO-IL MSA.

126

AC S M Am e rican Fitn e ss I nd ex 2 014 : Active ly Mov i n g A me r i c a to B e t te r H e al t h

Health and Community Fitness Status of the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas

127

You might also like