Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Physical Activity.

MCHbest Logo

Strategy. Open Streets

Approach. Implement open streets activities to encourage physical activity

Return to main MCHbest page >>

Overview. Open Streets initiatives allow community members to gather, socialize, walk, run, bike,[1] skate, dance, or participate in other activities on selected local streets by temporarily closing streets to motorized traffic.[2, 3] Some initiatives operate regularly in the same location while others change locations within an area; approach depends on the social, political, economic, and physical context of the city and neighborhood where the event will take place. Local governments, non-profits, or coalitions can undertake these events, with funding from a variety of sources, including public funds, private investments, and charitable donations.[4] Open streets events can be held regularly (e.g., weekly or monthly) or once or twice a year.[5]

Evidence. Expert Opinion. Strategies backed by expert opinion are recommended by professionals and are aligned with established frameworks. These approaches are consistent with field observations and national guidelines, but lack formal validation. Implement with robust evaluation to confirm impact.

Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source.

Potential Data Sources. Data to support this strategy can be accessed through:

  • Event planning and logistic records
  • Activity programming and participation logs
  • Volunteer and staff feedback/debriefing reports

Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):

  • Environmental Health. This strategy improves the impact of physical, chemical, and biological factors in the environment on health.
  • Health and Health Behaviors/Behavior Change. This strategy improves individuals' physical and mental health and their adoption of healthy behaviors (e.g., healthy eating, physical activity).

Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.

Intervention Type. Policy Development and Enforcement (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).

Intervention Level. Community-Focused

Examples from the Field. Access descriptions of ESMs that use this strategy or aligned components.

Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the RBA framework (see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort (“What/how much did we do?”)

  • Number of Open Streets events aligned with best practices in community engagement and active living promotion. (Assesses adherence to quality standards)
  • Number of partnerships formed with community organizations to plan and implement Open Streets. (Evaluates collaboration)

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort (“How well did we do it?”)

  • Percent of Open Streets routes designed to aligned with best practices in community engagement and active living promotion. (Assesses adherence to quality standards)
  • Percent of Open Streets events that incorporate local activities and traditions. (Evaluates responsiveness)

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect (“Is anyone better off?”)

  • Number of city departments collaborating to support Open Streets implementation. (Assesses integration into municipal operations)
  • Number of complementary health promotion activities integrated into Open Streets events. (Measures linkages with broader health goals)
  • Number of new regular physical activity groups formed as a result of Open Streets connections. (Quantifies sustained behavior change)
  • Number of new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements inspired by Open Streets feedback. (Assesses long-term community impacts)

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect (“How are they better off?”)

  • Percent of Open Streets events held in neighborhoods with limited access to parks and recreational facilities. (Measures distribution of resources)
  • Percent of planning committee members who represent key characteristics of the communities served. (Assesses comprehensive decision-making)
  • Percent increase in physical activity levels among Open Streets participants, disaggregated by key characteristics. (Directly evaluates behavior change across subgroups)
  • Percent reduction in gaps in perceived neighborhood walkability between different community areas. (Measures improvements in environmental access)

Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:

  1. Move from measuring quantity to quality.
  2. Move from measuring effort to effect.
  3. Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
  4. The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.

References

1 Eyler AA, Hipp A, Lokuta J. Moving the barricades to physical activity: A qualitative analysis of Open Streets initiatives across the United States. American Journal of Health Promotion. 2015;30(1):e50-e58. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.4278/ajhp.131212-QUAL-633

2 Hipp J, Eyler AA, Zieff SG, Samuelson MA. Taking physical activity to the streets: The popularity of ciclovía and open streets initiatives in the United States. American Journal of Health Promotion. 2014;28(3):114-116. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24380455/

3 Kuhlberg JA, Hipp JA, Eyler AA, Chang G. Open Streets initiatives in the United States: Closed to traffic, open to physical activity. Journal of Physical Activity and Health. 2014;11(8):1468-1474. https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jpah/11/8/article-p1468.xml

4 Montes F, Sarmiento OL, Zarama R, et al. Do health benefits outweigh the costs of mass recreational programs? An economic analysis of four ciclovía programs. Journal of Urban Health. 2011;89(1):153-170. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22170324/

5 Open Streets – Open Streets Project

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.