Search

The United States Department of Agricultures Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) supports nutrition incentive (NI) and produce prescription programs (PPRs). PPRs allow healthcare providers to prescribe fruits and vegetables (FVs) to patients experiencing low income and/or chronic disease(s) and who screen positive for food insecurity. We developed a Theory of Change (TOC) that summarizes how and why PPRs work, identifies what the programs hope to achieve, and elucidates the causal pathways necessary to achieve their goals. We created the PPR TOC through an iterative, participatory process that adapted our previously developed GusNIP NI TOC. The participatory process involved food and nutrition security experts, healthcare providers, PPR implementors, and PPR evaluators reviewing the existing NI TOC and suggesting modifications to accurately reflect PPRs. The resulting TOC describes the mechanisms, assumptions, rationale, and underpinnings that lead to successful and equitable outcomes. Modifications of the NI TOC centered around equity and focused on inclusion of healthcare as an additional partner and the importance of health and healthcare utilization as outcomes. The TOC describes how the GusNIP PPR program reaches its goals. This understanding will be useful for PPR developers, implementers, funders, and evaluators for describing the pathways, assumptions, and foundations of successful PPRs.

Food insecurity, or lack of consistent access to enough food, is associated with low intakes of fruits and vegetables (FVs) and higher risk of chronic diseases and disproportionately affects populations with low income. Financial incentives for FVs are supported by the 2018 Farm Bill and United States (U.S.) Department of Agriculture's Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) and aim to increase dietary quality and food security among households participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and with low income. Currently, there is no shared evaluation model for the hundreds of financial incentive projects across the U.S. Despite the fact that a majority of these projects are federally funded and united as a cohort of grantees through GusNIP, it is unclear which models and attributes have the greatest public health impact. We explore the evaluation of financial incentives in the U.S. to demonstrate the need for shared measurement in the future. We describe the process of the GusNIP NTAE, a federally supported initiative, to identify and develop shared measurement to be able to determine the potential impact of financial incentives in the U.S. This commentary discusses the rationale, considerations, and next steps for establishing shared evaluation measures for financial incentives for FVs, to accelerate our understanding of impact, and support evidence-based policymaking.

The USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides food and financial assistance to food-insecure individuals and families. In the midst of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, SNAP benefits evolved. Policy changes and federal legislation expanded SNAP eligibility, raised benefit levels, and introduced program waivers that enabled online ordering to reduce participants' exposure to community-acquired SARS-CoV-2. Although rapid expansion of SNAP benefits in the online space represents significant progress for federal food assistance, changes also introduced unforeseen partiality in how benefits and services were accessed and utilized, as illustrated by 2 populations and regions in the early months of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: low-income older adults in rural Alabama and low-income Hispanic adults in urban California. Opportunities exist to build on the recent progress in SNAP, while also ensuring continued inclusiveness of eligible persons. Efforts should be informed by evidence that supports equitable access to federal food assistance.

ObjectiveTo use cognitive interviewing and pilot testing to develop a survey instrument feasible for administering in the food pantry setting to assess daily intake frequency from several major food groups and dietary correlates (e.g. fruit and vegetable barriers) - the FRESH Foods Survey.DesignNew and existing survey items were adapted and refined following cognitive interviews. After piloting the survey with food pantry users in the USA, preliminary psychometric and construct validity analyses were performed.SettingThree US food banks and accompanying food pantries in Atlanta, GA, San Diego, CA, and Buffalo, NY.ParticipantsFood pantry clients (n 246), mostly female (68 %), mean age 54·5 (sd 14·7) years.ResultsMeasures of dietary correlates performed well psychometrically: Cronbach's α range 0·71-0·90, slope (α) parameter range 1·26-6·36, and threshold parameters (β) indicated variability in the 'difficulty' of the items. Additionally, all scales had only one eigenvalue above 1·0 (range 2·07-4·71), indicating unidimensionality. Average (median, Q1-Q3) daily intakes (times/d) across six dietary groups were: fruits and vegetables (2·87, 1·87-4·58); junk foods (1·16, 0·58-2·16); fast foods and similar entrées (1·45, 0·58-2·03); whole-grain foods (0·87, 0·58-1·71); sugar-sweetened beverages (0·58, 0·29-1·29); milk and milk alternatives (0·71, 0·29-1·29). Significant correlations between dietary groups and dietary correlates were largely in the directions expected based on the literature, giving initial indication of convergent and discriminant validity.ConclusionsThe FRESH Foods Survey is efficient, tailored to food pantry populations, can be used to monitor dietary behaviours and may be useful to measure intervention impact.

Summary: Background: Executive control and temperament have been associated with pediatric obesity. However, interactions between these constructs in relation to future weight outcomes have not been investigated. Objective: This longitudinal study examined early childhood executive control, early temperament (negative affectivity and surgency), and their interactions as predictors of adolescent BMI trajectories. Methods: At age 5.25, children (N = 229) completed executive control tasks, and parents completed the Child Behavior Questionnaire to assess temperament. BMI was calculated annually between ages 14–17. Results: Greater early negative affectivity predicted more positive BMI growth. Although early childhood executive control was not associated with BMI growth, greater negative affectivity predicted greater BMI escalation at average and below average executive control abilities. Conclusions: For children without robust executive control abilities early in development, negative affectivity may be a risk factor for accelerated adolescent BMI growth. Targeted assessment of early risk factors may be useful for childhood obesity prevention efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Food security is a commonly screened for health-related social need at hospitals and community settings, and until recently, there were no tools to additionally screen for nutrition security. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential advantage of including a one-item brief nutrition security screener (BNSS) alongside the commonly used two-item Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) food security screener for identifying individuals with diet-related health risks. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from April to June 2021. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess associations between screening status and dietary and health variables. Recruitment was done across five states (California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington) from community-based organizations. Participants (n = 435) were, on average, 44.7 years old (SD = 14.5), predominantly women (77%), and racially/ethnically diverse. In adjusted analyses, being in the food insecure and nutrition insecure group (but not the food insecure and nutrition secure or food secure and nutrition insecure groups) was associated with significantly increased odds for self-reported "fair" or "poor" general health [OR = 2.914 (95% CI = 1.521–5.581)], reporting at least one chronic condition [2.028 (1.024–4.018)], and "low" fruit and vegetable intake [2.421 (1.258–4.660)], compared with the food secure and nutrition secure group. These findings support using both the HVS and BNSS simultaneously in health-related social needs screening to identify participants at the highest risk for poor dietary and health outcomes and warrant further investigation into applying these screeners to clinical and community settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Depression has been linked to food security, particularly among low-income mothers. However, less is known about the relationship between CHAOS (Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale), a measure of family functioning such as timeliness and order, and varying levels food security. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the relationship between depression, CHAOS, and sociodemographics on the level of food insecurity in a cross-sectional sample of low-income households with children, ages 0-18 years. Participants were recruited from low-income communities in a medium sized Midwestern city in the United States. Eligible participants were =19 years of age, a parent or primary caregiver to at least one child, and English- or Spanish- speaking. Survey items included participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), food security, depression, CHAOS, and sociodemographics/family characteristics. Descriptives and Chi-square tests were conducted for all variables. Potential covariates were assessed (e.g., age, income, education, race/ethnicity, sex, SNAP participation, number of children and adults in the household, and marital status) and included in the final logistic regression model through backward elimination. All statistics were conducted using SAS (version 9.4, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Participants (N=252) were 75% female, 42% Non-Hispanic Black, 31% Non-Hispanic White, 12% Hispanic, and 15% other race categories. The mean number of children in households was 2.33 (SD=1.58), and half of the respondents reported earning =$10,000/year. Chi-Square tests showed univariate relationships between study variables and varying household food security levels. Those in the "high" and "medium" groups for depression and CHAOS were both more likely than the "low" groups to experience low or very low food security. Income and education were also related to food security, with low levels of education and low income being associated with low or very low food security. Age, sex, race/ethnicity, and marital status were not associated with food security status. The fully adjusted logistic regression models of depression and CHAOS accounted for 10% and 14% of the variance in food security, respectively (depression: (OR=0.31, CI=0.15-0.65; pp In the current study, CHAOS demonstrated a stronger relationship with food security than depression, when controlling for sociodemographics. CHAOS is a measurement that has not been tested widely among food insecure populations, but has been shown to be an influencing factor on child development, and might help explain some of the stress experienced by low-income families. Understanding more about the psychological aspects of food insecurity may help inform the development of tailored interventions to alleviate food insecurity in low-income households, and ultimately improve health, achievement and related outcomes in children.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine relationships between monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit duration (i.e., the number of weeks each month a participants' SNAP benefits provide food), and five primary outcome variables: food security, three hunger-coping behavior scales (rationing food supplies, financial strategies, making trade-offs), and physiological hunger symptoms, among a sample of families with children 0-18 years currently receiving SNAP benefits. Methods: Baseline survey data were collected as part of a community-based intervention to alleviate child hunger. Participants included in the analytic sample were current SNAP recipients, parents (or caregivers), and 19 years of age and older (n=161). The survey assessed sociodemographics, household characteristics, food and financial assistance use, food security, three hunger-coping behavior scales, diet intake frequency, and one physiological hunger symptoms scale. The three hunger-coping scales and the physiological hunger scale were dichotomized into a "high" group (if above the sample median score) and a "low" group (if at or below the sample median score). Sociodemographic and family characteristics were included as covariates. Logistic regression models were used to assess relationships between monthly SNAP benefit duration and the five primary outcome variables in this study. Results: Respondents were predominately mothers/female caregivers (78%), a majority reported annual family incomes below $10,000 (58%), and 80% were experiencing "low" or "very low" food security. The sample was 43% non-Hispanic black, 30% non-Hispanic white, 10% Hispanic/Latino, 17% American Indian or other racial/ethnic groups. Monthly SNAP benefit duration (M=2.8, SD=1.0) was not likely driven by allotment amount, because households' percent of the federal poverty line (a proxy measure for allotment amount) was not associated with the number of weeks each month that benefits lasted (p=0.36). After controlling for relevant sociodemographic variables and household characteristics, the more weeks each month participants reported their SNAP benefits lasting, the lower their odds of experiencing "low" or "very low" food security (OR=0.444, 95%CI=0.259-0.761; p Conclusions: These findings suggest that monthly SNAP benefit duration may be useful as a proxy for SNAP allotment adequacy in the context of food security and hunger. Families that were not able to make monthly benefits extend as long as other families were more likely to be food insecure and experience "high" levels of physiological hunger symptoms. While associations with hunger-coping behaviors were only significant in univariate analysis, they were in the direction expected and should be further examined in future studies as these behaviors may be exacerbate, buffer, or be symptoms of the experience of food insecurity and hunger among low-income families. Policies are needed to better tailor SNAP benefit allotments to the needs of disadvantaged families, and research and programming is needed to investigate ways these families can better utilize their current allotments as a potential path to address food insecurity and hunger.

Purpose To examine daily fruit and vegetable (FV) intake frequency by household food security status (high food security, marginal food security, low food security, and very low food security), and scores on three hunger-coping behavior scales (i.e., "rationing food supplies," "financial strategies," and "trade-off strategies"), and one physiological hunger symptoms scale among a very low-income population in the Midwestern United States. Methods Adult participants (aged 19 and older and caregivers to at least one child aged 0-18) were recruited from public libraries, food pantries, and other community locations to participate in a cross-sectional self-administered survey (n = 306). The primary outcome variable was daily FV intake frequency, measured from five items from the 16-item NYPANS dietary screener (fruit, green salad, carrots, other vegetables, and non-fried potatoes). These items were converted into daily frequencies and then summed. Daily FV intake frequency was also log transformed to meet statistical model assumptions. The main independent variables in this study were household food security (measured using the 6-item USDA Household Food Security Survey Module), scores on three 5-item hunger-coping behavior scales (max scores = 5), and one 5-item physiological hunger symptoms scale (max scores = 5). Potential sociodemographic and household characteristics (e.g., sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income, marital status, food assistance, income assistance, food pantry use, household child to adult ratio, and automobile access) were assessed as potential covariates. Generalized linear models were used to assess the relationship between independent variables and daily FV intake frequency. Results 278 participants provided complete data for the outcome variable and were included in the sample. The sample was 73% female, 45% African American, 14% Hispanic, and 28% Caucasian. A majority of participants (60%) reported annual household incomes under $15,000. A high proportion of participants (42%) had very lowfood security, as compared to the national average of 6%. Participants reported consuming FV 2.40 times per day (SD=1.76) on average. Compared the high food secure group (In adjusted models), being in the "very low" food security group was associated with a 26% decrease, on average, in daily FV intake frequency (exp(ß)=0.74, 95%CI=0.61-0.88, p Conclusions Compared to the high food secure group, those in the "very low" food secure group reported a significantly lower mean daily FV intake frequency, but not those in the "low" food secure group. This emphasizes the need to examine the "low" and "very low" food secure groups separately when studying factors associated with diet. Engaging in hunger-coping behaviors and experiencing physiological hunger symptoms was associated with decreased daily FV intake frequency. It is not clear if the hunger coping-behaviors themselves directly lead to decreased daily FV intake frequency, or if they were a marker for food insecurity and associated economic distress. These constructs and relationships should be examined in future studies. Programs and policies, which seek to promote fruit and vegetable intake among low-income populations, should target the "very low" food secure as the most at-risk for low intake. Also, researchers and community organizations working with food insecure groups could potentially measure hunger-coping behaviors and hunger symptoms in a complementary fashion to traditional measures of food insecurity to gain more contextual information about the experiences of this population.

The Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) supports increased funding for policies in the 2024 Farm Bill that align with a Food is Medicine (FIM) framework and address multiple dimensions of human and planetary health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the effects of the LiveWell@School Food Initiative (LW@SFI), a Colorado-based childhood obesity prevention program that partners with school districts to enable them to serve more scratch cooked foods through culinary training, action planning, and equipment grants. Methods: This evaluation used a quasi-experimental design that examined menu cycles prior to entering the LW@SFI and approximately 1 year later. A review of school menus with food service directors from 9 Colorado school districts was conducted. Results: Data show that districts changed an average of 17.4 entrées and 19.7 side dishes over the course of the year. Changes to serving scratch cooked foods were highest for sauces (an increase of 40.5%). No districts were cooking beans/legumes from scratch during baseline or at follow-up. Across the 9 districts, 7 observed statistically significant pre-post reductions in sodium, 4 in fat, 5 in saturated fat, and 3 in calories. Conclusions: Within a year of implementing the LW@SFI, school districts increased the proportion of fresh, scratch cooked foods they offered and this was associated with some decreases in calories, fat, saturated fat, and sodium, contributing to healthier school food environments.