Food Insecurity Among Children
Conditions
Keywords
Food Security, National School Lunch Program (NSLP), School Breakfast Program (SBP), Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), Food Backpacks
Brief summary
The 2010 Child Nutrition Reauthorization provided funding to test innovative strategies to end childhood hunger and food insecurity. Demonstration projects were funded in Chickasaw Nation, Kentucky, Navajo Nation, Nevada, and Virginia. This study focuses on Virginia. A selection of schools were randomly assigned to either a treatment or control group. Children in treatment schools received: (1) three meals during the school day and food packages for weekends and school breaks; (2) $60 monthly Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) benefits during summer months if they were eligible for FRP meals; and (3) nutrition education for their parents. The control group operated under business as usual.
Detailed description
Objective: To reduce hunger 365 days a year in households with schoolchildren by transforming schools into food hubs and providing nutrition education to parents. Target Population: Elementary (n=30), middle (n=6), and high schools (n=2) in rural and urban VA. All schools had low academic performance and at least 50 percent of children eligible for free and reduced-price (FRP) meals. Intervention: Schools were randomly assigned to either a treatment or control group. Children in treatment schools received: (1) three meals during the school day and food packages for weekends and school breaks; (2) $60 monthly Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) benefits during summer months if they were eligible for FRP meals; and (3) nutrition education for their parents. The control group operated under business as usual. Note that the $60 monthly benefit was not included in the evaluation of the demonstration.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALVA 365 Demonstration Benefits
Reducing hunger 365 days a year in households with school children by transforming schools into food hubs ( free breakfast, lunch, supper, and food backpacks for the weekend) and providing nutrition education to parents.
Sponsors
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
USDA Food and Nutrition Service
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
5 Years to 18 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* A selection of elementary, middle, and high schools in rural and urban Virginia, USA. * Schools must have had low academic performance and at least 50% or children eligible for free and reduced price through the National School Lunch Program or participating in the Community Eligibility Provision.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Food Insecurity among Children | Previous 30 days: once before intervention start and once during intervention implementation | Measured by the United States Department of Agriculture's Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM). Affirming 2 or more out of the 8 child-level items in the HFSSM. Higher scores generally indicates worsening food insecurity. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Very Low Food Insecurity among Children | Previous 30 days: once before intervention start and once during intervention implementation | Measured by the United States Department of Agriculture's Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM). Affirming 5 or more out of the 8 child-level items in the HFSSM. Higher scores generally indicates worsening food insecurity. |
| Food Insecurity among Adults | Previous 30 days: once before intervention start and once during intervention implementation | Measured by the United States Department of Agriculture's Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM). Affirming 3 or more out of the 10 adult-level items in the HFSSM. Higher scores generally indicates worsening food insecurity. |
| Household Food Insecurity | Previous 30 days: once before intervention start and once during intervention implementation | Measured by the United States Department of Agriculture's Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM). Affirming 3 or more out of the 18 items in the HFSSM. Higher scores generally indicates worsening food insecurity. |
Outcome results
None listed