Shared Use of Physical Activity Facilities Among North Carolina Faith Communities, 2013
ORIGINAL RESEARCH — Volume 14 — February 2, 2017
PEER REVIEWED
Figure. Counties represented by the faith communities that responded to the survey on sharing facilities for physical activity, North Carolina, 2013.
| No. of Respondents | County |
|---|---|
| 0 | Avery, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Camden, Carteret, Caswell, Clay, Columbus, Craven, Currituck, Dare, Duplin, Franklin, Gates, Graham, Granville, Greene, Halifax, Haywood, Hertford, Hoke, Jackson, Jones, Lenoir, Lincoln, Madison, Martin, Mitchell, Northampton, Onslow, Pamlico, Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Stokes, Swain, Transylvania, Tyrrell, Union, Vance, Washington, Wilson, Yancey |
| 1–5 | Alamance, Alexander, Alleghany, Anson, Ashe, Beaufort, Cabarrus, Catawba, Chatham, Cherokee, Chowan, Cleveland, Cumberland, Davie, Durham, Henderson, Hyde, Johnston, Macon, McDowell, Mecklenburg, Montgomery, Moore, New Hanover, Orange, Person, Pitt, Polk, Randolph, Richmond, Robeson, Rockingham, Rowan, Rutherford, Sampson, Scotland, Stanly, Surry, Warren, Watauga, Wayne, Wilkes, Yadkin |
| 6–9 | Davidson, Edgecombe, Gaston, Iredell, Nash |
| 10–30 | Forsyth, Guilford, Harnett, Lee, Wake |
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions.
Page last reviewed: February 2, 2017