Secondary Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

The New York State Healthy Neighborhoods Program: Findings From an Evaluation of a Large-Scale, Multisite, State-Funded Healthy Homes Program

Reddy, Amanda L. MS; Gomez, Marta MS; Dixon, Sherry L. PhD

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice: March/April 2017 - Volume 23 - Issue 2 - p 210–218
doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000529
Special Section: Evaluating the Impact of the New York State Healthy Neighborhoods Program: Research Articles

Context: A growing evidence base suggests that a comprehensive healthy homes approach may be an effective strategy for improving housing hazards that affect health, but questions remain about the feasibility of large-scale implementation.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a large-scale, multisite, state-funded healthy homes program.

Setting: Homes in high-risk neighborhoods of 13 counties funded under the New York State Healthy Neighborhoods Program (NYS HNP) from 2008 to 2012.

Participants: A total of 28 491 homes received an initial visit and 6436 dwellings received a revisit (follow-up assessment 3 to 6 months after the intervention). A majority of residents are low-income renters living in buildings built prior to 1950.

InterventionThe NYS HNP is a low-intensity healthy homes program. Participating homes undergo a visual assessment to identify potential environmental health and safety hazards, and interventions (education, referrals, and products) are provided to address any hazards identified during the visit.

Main Outcome Measures: The proportion of homes affected by several types of housing hazards, improvement in hazards among revisited homes, and the change in the overall number of hazards per home were assessed.

Results: Among the homes that were revisited, there were significant improvements in the conditions assessed for tobacco control, fire safety, lead poisoning prevention, indoor air quality, and other hazards (including pests and mold). There was a significant reduction in the number of hazards per home (2.8 to 1.5; P < .001), but homes were not hazard-free at the revisit.

Conclusion: This evaluation suggests that a comprehensive, low-intensity healthy housing approach can produce short-term impacts with public health significance. This evaluation provides information about hazards that are common, easily assessed, and easily corrected or improved, which may be of use to a variety of programs that already provide in-home services and are seeking to expand the scope of their visits or to inform the development of new programs.

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

National Center for Healthy Housing, Columbia, Maryland (Ms Reddy and Dr Dixon); and New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York (Ms Gomez).

Correspondence: Amanda L. Reddy, MS, National Center for Healthy Housing, 10320 Little Patuxent Pkwy, Ste 500, Columbia, MD 21044 (

Funding for the evaluation of this program was primarily supported by US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant NYHHU0004-12. Preliminary work was supported, in part, by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Center for Environmental Health cooperative agreements #5U59EH000212-03 and #5H64EH00015405. The authors acknowledge the staff and participants of the New York State Healthy Neighborhoods Program and, in particular, Kenneth Boxley, Philip DiMura, Joan Bobier, Lloyd Fox, Thomas Carroll, and Michael Cambridge, and the many residents who welcomed the program into their homes. The authors are grateful to David Jacobs and Jonathan Wilson for their expertise in selecting hazards for inclusion in the hazard score and for providing feedback on the manuscript.

The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the CDC, HUD, or any other federal or local government agency.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's Web site (

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.