Effect of a Multicomponent Food Pantry Intervention in Client Subgroups.

Nutrition promotion programs may have varying effects and influence health disparities. SuperShelf promotes healthy choices in food pantries through inventory changes and nudge implementation (e.g., choice architecture). This secondary analysis of the SuperShelf cluster-randomized trial assessed whether the effect of SuperShelf on client diet quality differed by equity characteristics. English-, Spanish-, or Somali-speaking adult clients from 11 food pantries in Minnesota were included (N = 193). We measured change in diet quality by the Healthy Eating Index 2015 (HEI-2015; maximum score 100) using up to two 24 h dietary recalls from pre-intervention and post-intervention periods. We used linear mixed-effects models to determine whether the effect of SuperShelf on diet quality varied by self-reported gender, race/ethnicity, education, and employment status. In separate adjusted models, the interactions of SuperShelf and gender, education, or employment status were not significant. The interaction of SuperShelf and race/ethnicity was significant (p-interaction = 0.008), but pairwise comparisons in diet quality were non-significant in all racial/ethnic subgroups. SuperShelf did not have differential effects on diet quality by gender, race/ethnicity, education, or employment status, suggesting it does not worsen dietary disparities among food pantry clients, though more subgroup analyses are needed to explore potential racial/ethnic disparities in this context.

A Cluster-Randomized Evaluation of the SuperShelf Intervention in Choice-Based Food Pantries.

BACKGROUND: Interventions in food pantry settings have the potential to improve health among clients at risk of diet-related disease. PURPOSE: This study evaluates whether a cluster-randomized, behavioral intervention in food pantries resulted in improved client outcomes. METHODS: Sixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to an intervention (n = 8) or control condition (n = 8). The intervention offered pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and implement behavioral economics strategies to promote healthy food selection. A convenience sample of adult clients were enrolled (paired sample, 158 intervention, 159 control) and followed for 1 year. Additional clients were enrolled at follow-up to assess food selection (follow-up sample, 85 intervention, 102 control). Analysis was limited to data from 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control) due to COVID-19. Outcome measures included Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) total and subcomponent scores for 24-hr dietary recalls and client cart selections, and Life's Simple 7 (LS7) total and subcomponent scores. Multilevel mixed-effects models tested whether client outcomes differed by intervention condition. RESULTS: In adjusted models, there were no statistically significant differences by intervention condition in HEI-2015 or LS7 scores. Clients in intervention food pantries had improved Refined Grain subcomponent scores (p = .004); clients in control pantries had worsened Saturated Fat subcomponents scores (p = .019) and improved physical activity scores (p = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health as measured by HEI-2015 or LS7. Coordinated efforts across settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.

Food pantries are an optimal setting to address health and diet quality among clients experiencing food insecurity. This study tests whether a food pantry intervention resulted in improved dietary and cardiovascular outcomes among clients. Sixteen Minnesota food pantries were randomized to either receive an intervention or a delayed intervention. The intervention offered food pantries technical assistance to improve healthy food supply and "nudge" clients toward healthy choices. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, measures were completed 11 pantries (5 intervention, 6 control). Outcome measures included diet quality of food selected by clients, diet quality of food consumed by clients, and Life's Simple 7 measure of cardiovascular health. The intervention did not result in improved diet quality or cardiovascular health. Coordinated efforts across community settings are needed to address health risks facing this population.

Construct validity of the Charitable Food Nutrition Index.

Background: Food pantries are an important source of food for those facing food insecurity. The Charitable Food Nutrition Index (CFNI) was developed for research and practice to measure the nutritional quality of assortments of foods in this setting. Objective: The study assessed the construct validity of the CFNI using secondary data from a group-randomized food pantry intervention in Minnesota. Methods: The CFNI was calculated for each client cart post-intervention (n = 187; 85 intervention, 102 control). CFNI scores were based on the proportion of items in each client cart ranked "green," "yellow," or "red" using the Healthy Eating Research Nutrition Guidelines for the Charitable Food System. An implementation score assessing intervention fidelity was measured for each pantry (n = 11; 5 intervention, 6 control) based on the four intervention subcomponents: aesthetics/use of space; healthy food prominence and appeal; unhealthy food de-emphasis; and stocking standards. Mixed linear models were used to test whether: (a) client carts from pantries in the intervention condition had higher CFNI scores than those in the control condition, and (b) higher implementation scores were associated with higher CFNI scores. Results: In adjusted models, clients from intervention group pantries had higher CFNI scores, reflecting a healthier assortment of foods compared with clients from control group pantries (p = 0.022). CFNI scores were positively associated with greater fidelity to the intervention (p = 0.020). Conclusions: The CFNI was sensitive enough to detect the effects of the intervention in the expected directions. These findings support its construct validity and utility as a measure in the charitable food system.

Evaluation of US Department of Agriculture Foods Programs for Households Using Nutrition Guidelines for the Charitable Food System.

BACKGROUND: US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foods programs for households (ie, The Emergency Food Assistance Program, Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, and Commodity Supplemental Food Program) are designed to provide nutritious foods at no cost to income-eligible individuals in the United States. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the nutritional quality of the foods available from 3 USDA Foods programs for households (ie, The Emergency Food Assistance Program, Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, and Commodity Supplemental Food Program) according to the Healthy Eating Research (HER) Guidelines for the Charitable Food System. DESIGN: Review of the nutritional information of the foods available from USDA Foods programs for households was performed. Using the HER Guidelines, foods were categorized into a 3-tiered system (ie, choose often/green; choose sometimes/yellow; choose rarely/red) based on levels of saturated fat, sodium, and added sugar per serving, and presence of whole grains. SETTING: All unique foods available from The Emergency Food Assistance Program, Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, and Commodity Supplemental Food Program (n = 152) for fiscal year 2022 were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nutritional quality of the foods available from USDA Foods programs for households according to the HER guidelines was measured. Foods were ranked green, yellow, red, or not ranked. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: The proportion of foods in each HER Guidelines' rank was calculated across the 3 USDA Foods programs for households and by each program. RESULTS: The majority of USDA Foods were ranked green (57.3%) or yellow (35.5%). A small number of items were ranked red (3.3%) or were unranked condiments or cooking staples (3.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The USDA Foods available in the household programs were primarily fruits and vegetables; lean proteins; whole grains; and low-fat dairy products that were consistent with national dietary guidelines. There is some room for improvement, and adjustments in the specifications for certain items are recommended to strengthen the nutritional value of the foods provided through these important federal programs.