Hiring Requirements and Qualifications of School Food Authority Directors Changed in Some Districts After Implementation of US Department of Agriculture Professional Standards.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the US Department of Agriculture set minimum education and training requirements (ie, professional standards) to ensure that school nutrition professionals have the knowledge and experience to operate school meal programs. No study to date has examined whether hiring requirements and qualifications of school food authority (SFA) directors have changed since 2015. OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in hiring requirements and qualifications of SFA directors since the US Department of Agriculture professional standards were established, overall and by district size. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of nationally representative district-level data from the 2012 and 2016 cycles of the School Health Policies and Practices Study. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: In 2012, 660 sampled districts completed the School Health Policies and Practices Study Nutrition Services questionnaire. In 2016, 599 sampled districts completed the questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hiring requirements for newly hired SFA directors and reported qualifications of SFA directors. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Differences in prevalence estimates from 2012 to 2016 for all districts and by district size were assessed with χ2 tests. RESULTS: Significant increases were found for 3 hiring requirements: degree in nutrition or related field, registered dietitian credential, and food safety certification. Significant changes in 4 of the 5 reported qualifications were found including an increase in the percentage of district directors with a degree in nutrition or a related field and decreases in the percentage of directors with a School Nutrition Specialist credential from the School Nutrition Association, School Nutrition Association certifications, and certified dietary managers. Changes were found in small and medium districts, but not large districts. CONCLUSIONS: District hiring requirements and SFA director qualifications have changed since the implementation of the US Department of Agriculture professional standards, including some differences by district size. Future research could identify challenges facing districts in hiring directors who have a degree in nutrition or related fields or who have specialized nutrition credentials or certificates (eg, registered dietitians).

A New Age of Evolution: Protecting the Consumer's Moral and Legal Right to Know through the Clear and Transparent Labeling of All Genetically Modified Foods.

The United States government, until recently, did not require the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). On July 29, 2016, President Barack Obama signed into law the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS). This law directs the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to create regulations that require manufacturers to disclose certain bioengineered products on food labels. On December 20, 2018, the USDA released the final regulations for the NBFDS, which requires food manufactures, importers, and certain retailers to ensure bioengineered foods are appropriately disclosed. The final regulations include provisions that will leave the majority of GMO derived foods unlabeled. The final regulations also restrict approximately 100 million Americans from accessing GMO information by allowing QR codes to replace clear and transparent labeling, an issue that will be discussed in further detail later in this Note. This Note explores why you, as a consumer, may want to know whether your food contains GM products, and furthermore, why you as a consumer have a moral and legal right to know.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): History, Politics, and Public Health Implications.

This commentary introduces a special section of AJPH on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the US government's largest antihunger program and third-largest antipoverty program. SNAP demonstrably lifts adults, children, and families out of poverty, thereby constituting a vital component of this nation's public health safety net.Despite its well-documented benefits, SNAP is under political and budgetary siege, mainly from congressional representatives and lobbying groups opposed to a federal role in welfare. In part, SNAP is protected from total annihilation by its unusual authorizing legislation-the Farm Bill.This commentary provides a brief overview of the political history of SNAP and its Farm Bill location as background to the deeper analyses provided in this series of articles.

Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive Grant Program: Implications for the 2018 Farm Bill and Future Directions.

The 2018 Farm Bill was finalized in mid-December of 2018 after months of discussion and debate between policymakers. The Farm Bill has many implications for low-income and food-insecure populations in the United States. One program within the Farm Bill that helps bridge the nutrition gap for low-income Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants is the Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive Grant Program (FINI). This commentary explores the best practices and promising findings of FINI projects to inform future policy discussions and implementation of FINI. In addition, we discuss knowledge gaps and opportunities within the context of the extant literature. Stakeholders and FINI grantees reported positive impacts of FINI grants, describing outcomes across farmers, grocery store owners, local economies, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants (eg, increased fruit and vegetable consumption). The 2018 Farm Bill was largely in alignment with the Academy's recommendations, and preserved the integrity of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as well as increased funding for FINI.

Factors associated with recovery of meat products following recalls due to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli.

Food-product recall data for recalls due to Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) from 2000 to 2012 were obtained for establishments regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). Statistical tests were used to assess the factors associated with recovery of product following STEC recalls along with the relationship between cluster detection and jurisdictions. Our results indicated that the percentage of recalled product recovered following a recall action due to STEC was dependent on the complexity of distribution, type of distribution, amount of time between production and recall dates, and the number of pounds of product recalled. Illness-related STEC recalls were associated with a lower percentage of product recovery which was probably impacted by larger amounts of product recalled, broader production scope, and delays from epidemiological and traceback investigations. Further, detection of illnesses related to STEC recalls seemed to be enhanced in states with additional resources and a history of successful foodborne investigations. This makes an argument for additional resources dedicated to public health agencies specifically for the surveillance of foodborne illnesses.