Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Evaluation and Program Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan Will the children use it?—A RE-AIM evaluation of a local public open space intervention involving children from a deprived neighbourhood Charlotte Skau Pawlowski ⁎ , Tanja Schmidt, Jonas Vestergaard Nielsen, Jens Troelsen, Jasper Schipperijn Research unit for Active Living, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark ARTICLE INFO Keywords: Deprived neighbourhood Active living Children RE-AIM Participatory design Public open space Implementation Maintenance ABSTRACT Knowledge on how to improve public open spaces in deprived neighbourhoods to increase active living among children is scarce and comprehensively evaluated public open space interventions are needed. Firstly, the aim was to explore if involving 39 local fifth-grade children (10–11 years old) from a deprived neighbourhood in creating playable installations in a public open space influenced their use of this space. Secondly, we wanted to explore if the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework (RE-AIM) was useful for evaluating different stages in the intervention project. RE-AIM was applied through a convergent mixed- methods triangulation design using survey, accelerometer, GPS, and interviews as data sources. Effectiveness outcomes revealed that on average the space was used less by the 39 children after the intervention. The im- plementation and maintenance dimensions revealed aspects of why most children involved in the project did not use the space after intervention. The evaluation cast light on children’s perceptions of their role, and importance of maintenance when the intervention was completed. In future, all dimensions of built environmental projects would benefit from being planned and evaluated in a collaboration with all project partners using an evaluation framework integrated and applied from the beginning of the project. 1. Introduction For children, physical inactivity is a great concern as only a small proportion meets the international guidelines (Inchley et al., 2016; Kalman et al., 2015) and the prevalence of inactivity increases from the age of 10 (Corder et al., 2015). Active living is a way of life that in- tegrates more physical activity (PA) into daily routines such as active transportation and play for pleasure (Edwards & Tsouros, 2006), and is associated with a multitude of positive short- and long-term health consequences due to its stimulating influence on physical, mental and social health (Hamer, Stamatakis, & Steptoe, 2009; Haskell, Blair, & Hill, 2009; O’Donovan et al., 2010). How active children are in their daily life is related to many individual factors such as age, gender, socio-economic status (SES), but also the characteristics of the physical environment they live in (Ding, Sallis, Kerr, Lee, & Rosenberg, 2011). The role of public open space in promoting active living has re- ceived increased attention the past decades (Giles-Corti et al., 2016; Jackson & Kochtitzky, 2010), particularly in deprived neighbourhoods to reduce social inequality in health (Cohen et al., 2017; Feng, Glass, Curriero, Stewart, & Schwartz, 2010; Gordon-Larsen, Nelson, Page, & Popkin, 2006). Studies have documented lower rates of use of public open space in deprived neighbourhoods (Cohen et al., 2012; Cohen et al., 2017) and knowledge on how to improve public open space in these areas to increase active living among children is scarce (Dunton, Almanza, Jerrett, Wolch, & Pentz, 2014). Providing playground facil- ities has been a typical strategy to improve children’s use of public open space, yet, many play facilities are often designed for young children and do not attract children from the age of 10 and up (Schacht, Høgstedt, & Pedersen, 2009; Zhang & Li, 2012). Using a participatory design to develop tailored environmental interventions has proven to be an effective and viable approach in deprived neighbourhoods (Minkler & Wallerstein, 2008). However, as the effect of environmental interventions varies, there is a need for evaluations providing greater attention to the experiences and practical implications of such inter- ventions (King, Glasgow, & Leeman-Castillo, 2010; Koorts & Gillison, 2015). The ‘Move the Neighborhood’ research project was conducted to collect comprehensive research-based knowledge on how to alter a https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101706 Received 25 October 2018; Received in revised form 22 August 2019; Accepted 22 August 2019 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: cspawlowski@health.sdu.dk (C.S. Pawlowski), tbschmidt@health.sdu.dk (T. Schmidt), jvestergaard@health.sdu.dk (J.V. Nielsen), jtroelsen@health.sdu.dk (J. Troelsen), jschipperijn@health.sdu.dk (J. Schipperijn). Evaluation and Program Planning 77 (2019) 101706 Available online 24 August 2019 0149-7189/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. T