ASU Food Policy and Environment Research Group

This study aims to examine children’s fruit, vegetable, and added sugar consumption relative to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the American Heart Association’s recommendations, as well as to compare children’s reported consumption with parental perception of the child’s overall diet quality. Data were drawn from 2 independent, cross sectional panels (2009–10 and 2014–15) of the New Jersey Child Health Study. The analytical sample included 2229 households located in five New Jersey cities. Daily consumption of fruit (cups), vegetables (cups), and added sugars (teaspoons) for all children (3–18 years old) were based on parent reports. Multivariate linear regression analyses estimated children’s adjusted fruit, vegetable, and added sugar consumption across parents’ perception categories (Disagree; Somewhat Agree; and Strongly Agree that their child eats healthy). Although only a small proportion of children meet recommendations, the majority of parents strongly agreed that their child ate healthy. Nonetheless, significant differences, in the expected direction, were observed in vegetable and fruit consumption (but not sugar) across parental perceptional categories for most age/sex groups. Dietary interventions tailored to parents should include specific quantity and serving-size information for fruit and vegetable recommendations, based on their child’s age/sex, and highlight sources of added sugar and their sugar content.

Disparities in healthy food access are well documented in cross-sectional studies in communities across the United States. However, longitudinal studies examining changes in food environments within various neighborhood contexts are scarce. In a sample of 142 census tracts in four low-income, high-minority cities in New Jersey, United States, we examined the availability of different types of food stores by census tract characteristics over time (2009–2017). Outlets were classified as supermarkets, small grocery stores, convenience stores, and pharmacies using multiple sources of data and a rigorous protocol. Census tracts were categorized by median household income and race/ethnicity of the population each year. Significant declines were observed in convenience store prevalence in lower- and medium-income and majority black tracts (p for trend: 0.004, 0.031, and 0.006 respectively), while a slight increase was observed in the prevalence of supermarkets in medium-income tracts (p for trend: 0.059). The decline in prevalence of convenience stores in lower-income and minority neighborhoods is likely attributable to declining incomes in these already poor communities. Compared to non-Hispanic neighborhoods, Hispanic communities had a higher prevalence of small groceries and convenience stores. This higher prevalence of smaller stores, coupled with shopping practices of Hispanic consumers, suggests that efforts to upgrade smaller stores in Hispanic communities may be more sustainable.

Objective

In response to recent national efforts to increase the availability of healthy food in small stores, we sought to understand the extent to which small food stores could implement the newly published Healthy Small Store Minimum Stocking Recommendations and reflect on the new US Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service's final rule for stocking of staple foods for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program–approved retailers.

Design

We collected qualitative and quantitative data from 57 small stores in four states (Arizona, Delaware, Minnesota, and North Carolina) that accepted Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program but not Special Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children benefits. Data from semistructured, in-depth interviews with managers/owners were transcribed, coded, and analyzed. We collected quantitative store inventory data onsite and later performed descriptive analyses.

Results

Store interviews revealed a reluctant willingness to stock healthy food and meet new recommendations. No stores met recommended fruit and vegetable stocking, although 79% carried at least one qualifying fruit and 74% carried at least one qualifying vegetable. Few stores met requirements for other food categories (ie, whole grains and low-fat dairy) with the exception of lean proteins, where stores carrying nuts or nut butter were more likely to meet the protein recommendation. Water and 100% juice were widely available and 68% met basic healthy beverage criteria.

Conclusions

In contrast to the inventory observed, most owners believed store stock met basic recommendations. Further, findings indicate that small stores are capable of stocking healthy products; however, technical and infrastructure support, as well as incentives, would facilitate shifts from staple to healthier staple foods. Retailers may need support to understand healthier product criteria and to drive consumer demand for new products.

In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.

Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.

Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65–3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32–2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6–14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0–13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.

WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

Objective: The Social Ecological Model (SEM) has been used to describe the aetiology of childhood obesity and to develop a framework for prevention. The current paper applies the SEM to data collected at multiple levels, representing different layers of the SEM, and examines the unique and relative contribution of each layer to children's weight status.

Design: Cross-sectional survey of randomly selected households with children living in low-income diverse communities.

Setting: A telephone survey conducted in 2009-2010 collected information on parental perceptions of their neighbourhoods, and household, parent and child demographic characteristics. Parents provided measured height and weight data for their children. Geocoded data were used to calculate proximity of a child's residence to food and physical activity outlets.

Subjects: Analysis based on 560 children whose parents participated in the survey and provided measured heights and weights.

Results: Multiple logistic regression models were estimated to determine the joint contribution of elements within each layer of the SEM as well as the relative contribution of each layer. Layers of the SEM representing parental perceptions of their neighbourhoods, parent demographics and neighbourhood characteristics made the strongest contributions to predicting whether a child was overweight or obese. Layers of the SEM representing food and physical activity environments made smaller, but still significant, contributions to predicting children's weight status.

Conclusions: The approach used herein supports using the SEM for predicting child weight status and uncovers some of the most promising domains and strategies for childhood obesity prevention that can be used for designing interventions.

In the face of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, food assistance programs adapted quickly and in unprecedented ways to meet the challenges of high unemployment, disruptions in the food supply, and school closures. Supported by US Department of Agriculture’s COVID-19 program-specific waivers, some programs relaxed their eligibility criteria, while others improvised on delivery modalities or temporarily increased benefits.1 To examine food assistance program participation and participant experiences during the first few months of the pandemic, we collected online survey data in July 2020 from a sample of over 1,500 U.S. households, representative of the US population. This brief summarizes participation in key food assistance programs, namely, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Program for Women Infants and Children (WIC), School Food Programs, as well as emergency food assistance provided through Food Pantries. 

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has affected employment and food security globally and in the United States. To understand the impacts of COVID-19 on food security in Arizona, a representative survey of Arizona households was launched online from July 1 to August 10, 2020. This brief provides an overview of changes in food security rate, perceived worries and challenges about food security, as well as behavioral changes and strategies adopted since the pandemic. Additional briefs from the Arizona survey covering topics on economic consequences, food access, and participations in food assistance programs during the pandemic are also available.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions in the food supply and high rates of unemployment and under-employment, both in Arizona and nationally. These emergencies required food assistance programs to adapt quickly and in unprecedented ways by relaxing eligibility criteria, improvising on delivery modalities, and increasing benefits. To examine food assistance program participation during the pandemic, we collected data from a representative sample of 620 Arizona households. The sample was drawn from across Arizona in July-August 2020 using an online survey. This brief provides the summary for participation in key food assistance programs, namely, the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Program for Women Infants and Children (WIC), School Food Programs, and the emergency food assistance provided through food pantries.