Lessons Learned from the 2019 Nebraska Floods: Implications for Emergency Management, Mass Care, and Food Security.

This qualitative study aimed to understand the actions, challenges, and lessons learned for addressing the food and water needs of flood survivors, with a special focus on vulnerable populations and the implications for food security, to inform future disaster response efforts in the U.S. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted from January to August 2020 with the local, state, and national stakeholders (n = 27) involved in the disaster response to the 2019 Nebraska floods, particularly those involved in providing mass care, such as food, water, and shelter, for the flood survivors. The challenge themes were related to limited risk awareness and apathy, the large scope of the impact, the difficulty with coordination and communication, the challenges in risk communication, the limited local-level capacity, and the perceived stigma and fear limiting the utilization of governmental assistance. The mitigation recommendations included the need to consider zoning and infrastructure updates, the implementation of efficient systems that leverage technology for coordination and communication, and guidance on how to address certain human factors. This study reinforces previous findings related to flood disasters and adds to our understanding of disaster response and food insecurity. The practical takeaways from this study can inform future flood-related disaster mitigation approaches in Nebraska and other rural areas.

Descriptive Characteristics of Nutrition Incentive Projects Across the U.S.: A Comparison Between Farm Direct and Brick and Mortar Settings.

The purpose of this study is to describe the programmatic characteristics of current nutrition incentive projects supported by the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP). Specifically, implementation characteristics of nutrition incentive projects that were funded in 2019 were compared across brick and mortar (B&M) and farm direct (FD) sites in the United States. Across 10 nutrition incentive (NI) grantees, there were 621 sites that reported data from B&M (n = 156) and FD (n = 465) locations. Among B&M sites, the common food retail types included: large chain traditional supermarket (n = 49) and independent traditional supermarket (n = 46). Among FD sites, the most frequently reported food retail types were farmers markets (n = 371). For B&M sites, the most common financial instruments were loyalty cards (n = 67, 43.5%), followed by an automatic discount at the register (n = 41, 26.6%), and coupons (n = 29, 18.8%). FD sites frequently reported physical financial instruments including tokens (n = 272, 61.1%), followed by paper vouchers (n = 131, 29.4%). Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases that were eligible to trigger incentives included mainly "all fresh FVs" at B&M sites (n = 98, 48.5%) and "all SNAP eligible items" at FD sites (n = 417, 85.8%). FVs eligible for incentive redemption included mainly "all fresh FVs" for both B&M sites (n = 110, 65.5%) and FD sites (n = 370, 67.6%). In terms of incentive-to-SNAP level ratio, both B&M sites and FD sites reported that they commonly utilized a 1:1 incentive-to-SNAP level ratio (n = 106, 68.8% and n = 261, 94.9% respectively). This paper will provide foundational understanding of the heterogeneity of GusNIP NI projects-specifically between B&M and FD settings-in order to inform future national work and ultimately demonstrate the impact of NI projects on food security status and dietary quality.