Voices for Food: Food Policy Councils, Food Security and Healthy Food Choices (VFF)

South Dakota State University

Status: Completed

Conditions: Nutritive Value; Food Security

Treatments: Behavioral: Coaching and Voices for Food Kit; Behavioral: Voices for Food Kit

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT03566095

2013-69004-20401

Details and patient eligibility

About

This study evaluates the effectiveness of coaching and Voices for Food materials on establishing Food Policy Councils (FPCs) and using guided client choice in rural food pantries to improve food security and diet quality among food pantry clients, and to improve the food environment in rural, midwestern food pantries. Half of the communities received coaching and the Voices for Food kit, the other half only received the Voices for Food kit.

Full description

Community coaching is a a strategy that helps community leaders plan for and overcome challenges to community development. Interventions at the community level are most effective when they are conceived and led by locals. Community coaches can aid the local community in the development of FPCs in rural communities. FPCs have the potential to improve the nutritional quality of available food, and connect a diverse network of food system stakeholders from the public, private and nonprofit sectors, which includes local food pantries. Food pantry users are food insecure and avoid hunger by consuming low cost and shelf stable food items. Guided client choice is a system of distribution that can be employed in food pantries and supported by FPCs. Guided client-choice is a model of distribution in which pantry clients choose the foods they would like from the pantry based upon family size and is formatted based upon USDA MyPlate. Guided client choice has been shown to meet the needs of the pantry client base better than the traditional model of distribution often found in food pantries. Food pantries have the opportunity to meet the nutritional needs of the food insecure population.

Voices for Food is a multi-leveled socio-ecological, longitudinal, matched treatment and comparison study to develop food policy councils (FPCs), and improve food security and diet quality in rural communities. Voices for Food was conducted in 24 rural, high poverty counties in South Dakota, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan, Nebraska and Ohio. Counties were assigned to a treatment (n=12) or comparison (n=12) group.

Intervention activities focus on three key components that impact food security: 1) community coaching by Extension Educators/field staff, 2) FPC development, and 3) development of a MyChoice (guided client choice) food pantry. Community coaching, along with the Voices for Food kit was only provided to treatment counties. Comparison communities only received the Voices for Food kit. Evaluation components focus on three levels of the intervention: 1) Community (FPCs), 2) Food Pantry Organization and Food Environment, and 3) Pantry Client & Families. Participants in this study were community stakeholders, food pantry directors, staff/volunteers and food pantry clients. Pantry food access/availability including pantry food quality and quantity, household food security and pantry client dietary intake are dependent variables.

Enrollment: 1,735 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18+ years old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Food Pantry Clients must be current clientele by visiting the participating food pantry at least once in the last year, English-speaking.
• Food Pantry Directors must be 18 years or older (19 if in Nebraska), English-speaking and a director of a participating food pantry.
• Food Pantry Staff/Volunteers must be 18 years or older (19 if in Nebraska), English-speaking and a staff/volunteer of a participating food pantry.
• Community Stakeholders must be 18 years or older (19 if in Nebraska), English-speaking and reside in the participating community.

Exclusion criteria

• Under 18 years old (19 if in Nebraska)
• Non English- speaking

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Non-Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Single Blind

---

1,735 participants in 2 patient groups

Coaching and Voices for Food Kit

Active Comparator group

Description:

The treatment communities received community coaching from an Extension Professional or Educator in the use of the Voices for Food kit.

Treatment:

Behavioral: Coaching and Voices for Food Kit

Voices for Food Kit

Sham Comparator group

Description:

The comparison community received the Voices for Food kit.

Treatment:

Behavioral: Voices for Food Kit