Food Policy Council Case Study Describing Cross-sector Collaboration for Food System Change in a Rural Setting.

PROBLEM: Food Policy Councils (FPCs) are cross-sector collaborations that bring representatives from across the food system together to identify issues, coordinate programs, and inform policy. Little is known about how rural FPCs operate to influence food access in their communities. PURPOSE: To explore how a rural FPC facilitates cross-sector partnerships and influences food system change through interviews with eight members of the Adam's County FPC. RESULTS: Connections developed through the FPC helped council members work more effectively in their home organizations. Four themes were discussed: council dynamics and structure; sharing resources, expertise, and information; promoting healthy food access through programs; and food policy opportunities and challenges. CONCLUSIONS: This case study illustrates connections between FPC members in a rural county and identifies how FPCs can facilitate food system change in their communities. Improving our understanding of how rural FPCs function can help to advance the potential public health impact of councils.

Healthy options: a community-based program to address food insecurity.

The objectives of this study are to better understand the lived experience of food insecurity in our community and to examine the impact of a community-based program developed to increase access to local, healthy foods. Participants were given monthly vouchers to spend at local farmers' markets and invited to engage in a variety of community activities. Using a community-based participatory research framework, mixed methods were employed. Survey results suggest that most respondents were satisfied with the program and many increased their fruit and vegetable consumption. However, over 40% of respondents reported a higher level of stress over having enough money to buy nutritious meals at the end of the program. Photovoice results suggest that the program fostered cross-cultural exchanges, and offered opportunities for social networking. Building on the many positive outcomes of the program, community partners are committed to using this research to further develop policy-level solutions to food insecurity.

Parental perception vs. professional assessment of speech changes following premature loss of maxillary primary incisors.

PURPOSE: This study's purpose was to compare parental perceptions of children's speech changes with a professional speech assessment following premature extractions of maxillary primary incisors (PEMPI). METHODS: Healthy 5- to 6-year-olds, with no cognitive and speech delay and who received PEMPI between the ages of 2 and 4 years old at a university-based clinic, were recruited for the study. First, their parents took part in a telephone interview regarding their perceptions of speech changes following the extractions. The children were then invited to undergo individual speech evaluations by a certified speech and language pathologist. RESULTS: Of 204 patients identified from the database, 57 parental interviews were completed. Sixty percent (34) felt their children sounded different following extractions, and 65% (37) reported difficulty with pronunciation of the "s" sound. For children who were perceived by their parents to sound different, 46% had problems pronouncing words with the letters s and z. For parents who did not perceive speech changes, none of the children had problems with s and z as determined by the professionally conduced speech evaluations (Fisher exact test P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Children who undergo premature extractions of maxillary primary incisors show problems articulating words containing s and z, and there is an agreement between parental perceptions and actual disarticulations detected from a professional assessment.