EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY GARDENS ON SOCIAL EQUITY AND PUBLIC HEALTH: A CASE STUDY OF CARAMEL CONNECTIONS FOUNDATION'S (CCF) SEEDS OF JOY COMMUNITY GARDEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community gardens have been increasingly recognized as effective public health interventions that address food insecurity, foster social cohesion, and promote environmental sustainability. This evaluation examines the impact of the Caramel Connections Foundation (CCF) Seeds of Joy Community Garden in Ontario, California, by assessing its effectiveness in advancing social equity, improving public health outcomes, and fostering community engagement. Using an evaluation framework, this study measures key program outcomes, including improvements in community well-being, inclusivity, and access to green spaces. A mixed-methods evaluation design was applied, incorporating process and impact evaluation methodologies. Secondary data collected from CCF’s existing program records, survey responses, and focus group discussions were analyzed to assess participant experiences and perceptions. The evaluation questions focused on the extent to which the garden contributed to social connectedness, health literacy, and resource accessibility, particularly for underserved populations. The survey instrument, pre-tested for clarity and validity, measured participant perceptions of social equity, health-promoting behaviors, and neighborhood resilience, aligning with social determinants of health (SDOH) frameworks. Findings indicate that the Seeds of Joy Community Garden serves as a key community asset, enhancing social cohesion and contributing to health equity efforts by addressing food insecurity, increasing access to nutritious food, green space, and educational programming. As this evaluation relied solely on secondary data provided by the nonprofit, Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was not required. Ethical considerations were upheld, including the use of de-identified program data and adherence to best practices in public health program evaluation. The results of this evaluation provide actionable insights for scaling similar community-driven interventions, guiding future program improvements, and informing public health policies that promote equitable access to environmental and health resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".