BMC Public Health 2009, 9:207 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/9/207 at LSOA level. Using figures derived from the most deprived LSOAs and with an effect size set at half the cur- rent claimant rate it was estimated that 9 paired clusters would give the required power. In our study we have 20 paired clusters. No data on HPA was available at small area level to carry out such a calculation. Within each cluster a random sample of 100 adults gives sufficient power on both the above measures. Full details of the power calculations are available from the authors on request. Using the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD)[19] all 4765 LSOAs in London were ranked. The most deprived 11% by IMD score were spread across 20 London Bor- oughs. These Boroughs were then invited to take part in the project and all 20 accepted. In each Borough the four most deprived LSOAs were identified and local authorities and health managers were requested to select two from these four, conditional on the selected LSOAs not border- ing each other. One of the two was then randomly allo- cated to the intervention group and the other to be its matched 'pair' in the control group. Full profiles of the Well London intervention and control LSOAs are at http:/ /www.uel.ac.uk/ihhd/programmes/documents/ Profiles_000.xls. The evaluations involve two survey waves; one at the start (2008) and one at the end (2012) of the project. Each wave consists of an adult survey of those above the age of 16 and an adolescent survey of those between the ages of 11 and 16 all of whom live in the selected areas. A quali- tative study will investigate and explore in greater depth the effect of the interventions on individuals. This will be undertaken through interviews with a subset of those both participating and not participating in the projects and will take place in 11 of the intervention areas over the course of the project. We will also collect data on the health related quality of the Social and Physical Environ- ment of each area to assess the impact of the structural and ecological aspects of the areas on health outcomes. Adult Survey The baseline data collection period for this survey ran from March 2008 to June 2009. One hundred and fifty non-business addresses were selected from the Post Office Address File (PAF) for each LSOA. Letters were sent to each selected address inviting residents to take part in the survey. Interviewers recruited through local community organisations and job advertising websites were trained prior to the first wave of data collection. They then called on those who had not asked to be excluded. Participants were offered a £10 shopping voucher to compensate them for their time in completing the questionnaire. The target sample size was 100 individuals in each cluster. Non responses were recorded on contact sheets and were bro- ken down into: a) inability to locate address; b) inability to contact eligible adult and c) refusal to participate. No data on individual or household characteristics was col- lected from refusals. The survey required informed consent and was approved by the University of East London Research Ethics Com- mittee. The survey instrument is 28 pages long and is divided into six sections. In the first section standard questions are asked to explore the respondents' socio-demographic and economic characteristics (age, income, education, ethnic group). The second section uses the International Physical Activity Questionnaire [23] to assess self reported HPA through the last seven days. The validity of this measure is known to be high in terms of test-retest and is well corre- lated with objective measures of HPA. The third section 'wellbeing' measures both negative and positive aspects of psychological mood firstly using the GHQ12 [24,25] and then the 8 item 'Hope Dispositional' scale[26,27]. This scale defines 'hope' as an individual's perceptions of their capacities to conceptualise goals, develop strategies to reach those goals and initiate and sustain the motivation for using those strategies. By looking at 'hope' and 'well- being' in a way linked to 'capacity' we connect it to aspects of the environment in which the individual operates and thus make this measure responsive to changes likely to be brought about by the Well London interventions. Section three concludes with some questions exploring social cap- ital (opinions on neighbourhood quality) and social net- works. The fourth section asks questions on foodstuffs consumed in the last day. These questions are adapted from the Health Survey for England [28] and their focus is the consumption of fruit and vegetables. Although these questions are insufficient to provide detailed information on nutritional intake at an individual level, data collected in short form questionnaires has been shown to be corre- lated with consumption recorded in food diaries[29] and is sufficient for analysing group consumption patterns necessary for evaluating the intervention in this trial. Sev- eral questions also explore food-related behaviour. The fifth section contains questions on participation in, or attendance at a list of cultural and artistic events drawn from a survey carried out by the Arts Council for England [30]. The final section asks about general health and aspects of health related to quality of life. We use the EQ-5D, a 5- item measure of health-related quality of life developed by Euroquol [31]. This defines health quality across the five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain or Page 5 of 11 (page number not for citation purposes)