###### Abstract
used Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) to monitor ecosystem restoration and assess its impact on community resilience [21]. [PERSON] et al. synthesized ecological indicators such as the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Land Surface Temperature (LST), Land Surface Moisture (LSM), and the Normalized Differential Build-up and Bare Soil Index (NDBSI) to evaluate temporal and spatial variations in ecological quality using principal component analysis [22]. [PERSON] et al. investigated the response of vegetation to drought on the Mongolian Plateau, utilizing Gross Primary Production (GPP) and Leaf Area Index (LAI) to improve predictions of ecosystem responses to climate change [23]. However, while greenness indices can effectively reflect vegetation cover in carbon sink projects, they inadequately capture the intrinsic health and complexity of ecosystems. Ecosystem health is a cornerstone of contemporary ecosystem management. A healthy ecosystem can sustain its structure and functions, recover from disturbances, and deliver essential services such as water storage and biological resource production [24; 25]. Scholars have increasingly emphasized the assessment of ecological quality through ecosystem health indicators. For instance, [PERSON] et al. applied the VOR model to evaluate life support system capacity in Tehran from 1988 to 2021 [26]; [PERSON] et al. analyzed long-term trends and short-term fluctuations in ecosystem services on the Tibetan Plateau by assessing carbon sequestration, water conservation, soil retention, wind erosion protection, and habitat quality [27]. Similarly, [PERSON] et al. reviewed the ecological outcomes of the TNSFP over four decades, focusing on windbreak and sand fixation, soil erosion control, forest carbon sequestration, crop yields, and economic development [28]. While ecosystem health indicators effectively reflect intrinsic ecological connections and sustainability, they are less suited for accurately assessing an ecosystem's carbon sink capacity. This study integrates greenness and ecosystem health characteristics to establish a comprehensive ecological quality evaluation framework. The health evaluation incorporates four key dimensions (ecological patterns, ecological functions, biodiversity, and ecological stress) that encompass ecosystem stability, sustainability, and resilience. Simultaneously, greenness is assessed using NDVI, LAI, and GPP indices to characterize vegetation cover. This dual approach enables a holistic understanding of ecological quality, encompassing both structural and functional aspects of ecosystems. The objectives of this study are (1) to comprehensively assess the ecological quality of the TNSFP implementation area in Inner Mongolia by combining ecosystem greenness and health characteristics and (2) to analyze the spatial distribution patterns of ecological quality across the study area and identify key ecological quality areas based on the assessment results. To achieve these objectives, the expected results are as follows: (1) an analysis of the spatial differentiation characteristics of ecological health, ecological greenness, and ecological quality in Inner Mongolia and (2) the identification of key ecological quality areas based on ecological quality divergence patterns.