Items were a combination of closed and open-ended questions. The response rate was 53% (10 out of 19). Through this survey, the Task Force assessed participating districts’ views about the SUA process; the survey included questions about barriers facing each district and planned use for each of the SUAs. Results from the survey helped inform the Task Force about school districts’ needs and concerns regarding the agreements. The Task Force applied these findings, along with other school information, to help characterize the types of legal clauses in the agreements,
which addressed common issues such as cost-sharing, liability, and facility maintenance. The challenges addressed through the survey were concerns regarding: operations/maintenance, liability, staffing, vandalism, budget, and safety. This information provided a framework from which to expand upon and to identify additional barriers that may face school districts
in establishing check details a sustainable partnership through a SUA. From 2010 to 2012, the JUMPP Task Force facilitated 18 SUAs in the seven school districts. These 18 SUAs included programmatic and open-gate agreements and varied in terms of duration, scope and codified arrangements with the community. Although a few of the agreements were initiated prior to the start of RENEW, most were started and completed with JUMPP Task Force support (i.e., JUMPP provided staffing, technical assistance, or both). The shared-use framework of JUMPP allowed selected districts selleck products the flexibility to use a variety of existing mechanisms (e.g., civic center permit, space lease agreement, Memorandum of Understanding [MOU], and other formalized agreements) to implement arrangements that mutually benefited each school and the community partner(s). For the purposes of this article, all 18 JUMPP-assisted agreements were grouped under the
general category of “SUAs”, as long as they provided the desired outcome of increasing community access to school property for physical activity, with a focus on children and adults, regardless Rebamipide of legal status. To be included in the analysis, JUMPP-assisted SUAs must have been executed by the end of March 2012. Using the challenges listed in the school site and community partner survey as a baseline (operations/maintenance, liability, staffing, vandalism, budget, and safety), we developed a framework from which to evaluate the completed SUAs. Vandalism was incorporated under the safety clause, since it seems to encompass the concerns covered by the clause. The remaining clauses came from reviewing tools provided by other organizations that have conducted extensive research on shared-use documents (ChangeLab Solutions, 2009a and Vincent and Cooper, 2008). Clauses that overlapped the model agreements provided by ChangeLab Solutions and were identified as important in other shared-use partnership tools were included in the evaluation.