Dataset Information

Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases.

ABSTRACT: To encourage the consumption of more fresh fruits and vegetables, the 2014 United Sates Farm Bill allocated funds to the Double Up Food Bucks Program. This program provided Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program beneficiaries who spent $10 on fresh fruits and vegetables, in one transaction, with a $10 gift card exclusively for Michigan grown fresh fruits and vegetables. This study analyzes how fruit and vegetable expenditures, expenditure shares, variety and purchase decisions were affected by the initiation and conclusion, as well as any persistent effects of the program.Changes in fruit and vegetable purchase behaviors due to Double Up Food Bucks in a supermarket serving a low-income, predominantly Hispanic community in Detroit, Michigan were evaluated using a difference in difference fixed effects estimation strategy.We find that the Double Up Food Bucks program increased vegetable expenditures, fruit and vegetable expenditure shares, and variety of fruits and vegetables purchased but the effects were modest and not sustainable without the financial incentive. Fruit expenditures and the fruit and vegetable purchase decision were unaffected by the program.This study provides valuable insight on how a nutrition program influences a low-income, urban, Hispanic community's fruit and vegetable purchase behavior. Policy recommendations include either removing or lowering the purchase hurdle for incentive eligibility and dropping the Michigan grown requirement to better align with the customers' preferences for fresh fruits and vegetables.

SUBMITTER: Steele-Adjognon M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5727931 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases.

Steele-Adjognon Marie M Weatherspoon Dave D

BMC public health 20171212 1

<h4>Background</h4>To encourage the consumption of more fresh fruits and vegetables, the 2014 United Sates Farm Bill allocated funds to the Double Up Food Bucks Program. This program provided Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program beneficiaries who spent $10 on fresh fruits and vegetables, in one transaction, with a $10 gift card exclusively for Michigan grown fresh fruits and vegetables. This study analyzes how fruit and vegetable expenditures, expenditure shares, variety and purchase decisi ...[more]

PMID: 29233128

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceFood insecurity is associated with a less healthy diet. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is associated with reduced food insecurity, but benefit levels may be insufficient for beneficiaries to afford healthy foods.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether participation in SuperSNAP, a program that provides an additional $40 per month for the purchase of fruits and vegetables with no added sugar, sodium, or fat to SNAP beneficiaries, is associated with changes in food purchasing.Design, setting, and participantsThis longitudinal cohort study used data from transaction records of a large supermarket chain with approximately 500 stores located across North Carolina from October 2019 to April 2020. Participants were SNAP beneficiaries.ExposureSuperSNAP participation.Main outcomes and measuresMonthly spending on all fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts (primary outcome); spending on less healthy food categories; and spending on sugar-sweetened beverages as 1 category of less healthy foods. Monthly data on purchases by SNAP beneficiaries before and during SuperSNAP participation were compared with data from SNAP beneficiaries not enrolled in the program who shopped at the same stores. Overlap weighting (a propensity score-based method) was used to account for confounding, and linear mixed-effects models were fitted with random effects to account for repeated measures and clustering by store.ResultsThe study included 667 SuperSNAP participants and 33 246 SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP but shopped in the same stores; 436 SuperSNAP participants had preintervention data and were included in the main analysis. SuperSNAP participation was associated with increased monthly purchases of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and legumes ($31.84; 95% CI, $31.27-$32.42; P < .001; 294.52 oz; 95% CI, 288.84-300.20 oz; P < .001). Only a small increase in spending on less healthy food categories compared with the SNAP beneficiaries who did not use SuperSNAP ($1.60; 95% CI, $0.67-$2.53; P < .001) was observed. As total spending increased, the proportion of total food and beverage spending on less healthy foods significantly decreased (difference, 4.51%; 95% CI, 4.27%-4.74%; P < .001). Monthly spending on sugar-sweetened beverages decreased (difference, $1.83; 95% CI, $1.30-$2.36; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, participation in SuperSNAP was associated with meaningful increases in healthy food purchasing. Subsequent studies should investigate whether healthy food incentive programs improve health outcomes.

Project description:The low intake of fruits/vegetables (FV) by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants is a persistent public health challenge. Fruit and vegetable incentive programs use inducements to encourage FV purchases. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify structural factors in FV incentive programs that may impact program effectiveness, including (i.) differences in recruitment/eligibility, (ii.) incentive delivery and timing, (iii.) incentive value, (iv.) eligible foods, and (v.) retail venue. Additionally, the FV incentive program impact on FV purchase and/or consumption is summarized. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for scoping reviews, a search of four bibliographic databases resulted in the identification of 45 publications for consideration; 19 of which met the pre-determined inclusion criteria for full-length publications employing a quasi-experimental design and focused on verified, current SNAP participants. The data capturing study objective, study design, sample size, incentive program structure characteristics (participant eligibility and recruitment, delivery and timing of incentive, foods eligible for incentive redemption, type of retail venue), and study outcomes related to FV purchases/consumption were entered in a standardized chart. Eleven of the 19 studies had enrollment processes to receive the incentive, and most studies (17/19) provided the incentive in the form of a token, coupon, or voucher. The value of the incentives varied, but was usually offered as a match. Incentives were typically redeemable only for FV, although three studies required an FV purchase to trigger the delivery of an incentive for any SNAP-eligible food. Finally, most studies (16/19) were conducted at farmers' markets. Eighteen of the 19 studies reported a positive impact on participant purchase and/or consumption of FV. Overall, this scoping review provides insights intended to inform the design, implementation, and evaluation of future FV incentive programs targeting SNAP participants; and demonstrates the potential effectiveness of FV incentive programs for increasing FV purchase and consumption among vulnerable populations.

Project description:BackgroundThe Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides approximately US$70 billion annually to support food purchases by low-income households, supporting approximately 1 in 7 Americans. In the 2018 Farm Bill, potential SNAP revisions to improve diets and health could include financial incentives, disincentives, or restrictions for certain foods. However, the overall and comparative impacts on health outcomes and costs are not established. We aimed to estimate the health impact, program and healthcare costs, and cost-effectiveness of food incentives, disincentives, or restrictions in SNAP.Methods and findingsWe used a validated microsimulation model (CVD-PREDICT), populated with national data on adult SNAP participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2009-2014, policy effects from SNAP pilots and food pricing meta-analyses, diet-disease effects from meta-analyses, and policy, food, and healthcare costs from published literature to estimate the overall and comparative impacts of 3 dietary policy interventions: (1) a 30% incentive for fruits and vegetables (F&V), (2) a 30% F&V incentive with a restriction of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), and (3) a broader incentive/disincentive program for multiple foods that also preserves choice (SNAP-plus), combining 30% incentives for F&V, nuts, whole grains, fish, and plant-based oils and 30% disincentives for SSBs, junk food, and processed meats. Among approximately 14.5 million adults on SNAP at baseline with mean age 52 years, our simulation estimates that the F&V incentive over 5 years would prevent 38,782 cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, gain 18,928 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and save $1.21 billion in healthcare costs. Adding SSB restriction increased gains to 93,933 CVD events prevented, 45,864 QALYs gained, and $4.33 billion saved. For SNAP-plus, corresponding gains were 116,875 CVD events prevented, 56,056 QALYs gained, and $5.28 billion saved. Over a lifetime, the F&V incentive would prevent approximately 303,900 CVD events, gain 649,000 QALYs, and save $6.77 billion in healthcare costs. Adding SSB restriction increased gains to approximately 797,900 CVD events prevented, 2.11 million QALYs gained, and $39.16 billion in healthcare costs saved. For SNAP-plus, corresponding gains were approximately 940,000 CVD events prevented, 2.47 million QALYs gained, and $41.93 billion saved. From a societal perspective (including programmatic costs but excluding food subsidy costs as an intra-societal transfer), all 3 scenarios were cost-saving. From a government affordability perspective (i.e., incorporating food subsidy costs, including for children and young adults for whom no health gains were modeled), the F&V incentive was of low cost-effectiveness at 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $548,053/QALY) but achieved cost-effectiveness ($66,525/QALY) over a lifetime. Adding SSB restriction, the intervention was cost-effective at 10 years ($68,857/QALY) and very cost-effective at 20 years ($26,435/QALY) and over a lifetime ($5,216/QALY). The combined incentive/disincentive program produced the largest health gains and reduced both healthcare and food costs, with net cost-savings of $10.16 billion at 5 years and $63.33 billion over a lifetime. Results were consistent in probabilistic sensitivity analyses: for example, from a societal perspective, 1,000 of 1,000 iterations (100%) were cost-saving for all 3 interventions. Due to the nature of simulation studies, the findings cannot prove the health and cost impacts of national SNAP interventions.ConclusionsLeveraging healthier eating through SNAP could generate substantial health benefits and be cost-effective or cost-saving. A combined food incentive/disincentive program appears most effective and may be most attractive to policy-makers.

Project description:IntroductionThe Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) required major revisions to food packages in 2009; effects on nationwide low-income household purchases remain unexamined.MethodsThis study examines associations between WIC revisions and nutritional profiles of packaged food purchases from 2008 to 2014 among 4,537 low-income households with preschoolers in the U.S. (WIC participating versus nonparticipating) utilizing Nielsen Homescan Consumer Panel data. Overall nutrients purchased (e.g., calories, sugar, fat), amounts of select food groups with nutritional attributes that are encouraged (e.g., whole grains, fruits and vegetables) or discouraged (e.g., sugar-sweetened beverages, candy) consistent with dietary guidance, composition of purchases by degree of processing (less, moderate, or high), and convenience (requires preparation, ready to heat, or ready to eat) were measured. Data analysis was performed in 2016. Longitudinal random-effects model adjusted outcomes controlling for household composition, education, race/ethnicity of the head of the household, county quarterly unemployment rates, and seasonality are presented.ResultsAmong WIC households, significant decreases in purchases of calories (-11%), sodium (-12%), total fat (-10%), and sugar (-15%) occurred, alongside decreases in purchases of refined grains, grain-based desserts, higher-fat milks, and sugar-sweetened beverages, and increases in purchases of fruits/vegetables with no added sugar/fats/salt. Income-eligible nonparticipating households had similar, but less pronounced, reductions. Changes were gradual and increased over time.ConclusionsWIC food package revisions appear associated with improved nutritional profiles of food purchases among WIC participating households compared with low-income nonparticipating households. These package revisions may encourage WIC families to make healthier choices among their overall packaged food purchases.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough nutrients in fruits and vegetables are necessary for proper development and disease prevention, most US children consume fewer servings than recommended. Prescriptions for fruits and vegetables, written by physicians to exchange for fresh produce, address access and affordability challenges while emphasizing the vital role of diet in health promotion and disease prevention. Michigan's first fruit and vegetable prescription program (FVPP) exclusively for children was introduced in 2016 at one large pediatric clinic in Flint and expanded to a second clinic in 2018. The program provides one $15 prescription for fresh produce to all pediatric patients at every office visit. Prescriptions are redeemable at a year-round farmers' market or a local mobile market. The current study will assess the impact of this FVPP on diet, food security, and weight status of youth.MethodsDemographically similar pediatric patient groups with varying levels of exposure to the FVPP at baseline will be compared: high exposure (> 24 months), moderate exposure (12-24 months), and no previous exposure. Data collection will focus on youth ages 8-16 years. A total of 700 caregiver-child dyads (one caregiver and one child per household) will be enrolled in the study, with approximately 200 dyads at clinic 1 (high exposure); 200 dyads at clinic 2 (moderate exposure), and 300 dyads at clinic 3 (no previous exposure). Children with no previous exposure will be introduced to the FVPP, and changes in diet, food security, and weight status will be tracked over two years. Specific aims are to (1) compare baseline diet, food security, and weight status between pediatric patients with varying levels of exposure to the FVPP; (2) measure changes in diet, food security, and weight status before and after never-before-exposed children are introduced to the FVPP; and (3) compare mean 12- and 24-month follow-up measures of diet, food security, and weight status in the initial no exposure group to baseline measures in the high exposure group.DiscussionCompletion of study aims will provide evidence for the effectiveness of pediatric FVPPs and insights regarding the duration and intensity of exposure necessary to influence change.Trial registrationThe study was registered through clinicaltrials.gov [ID: NCT04767282] on February 23, 2021.

Dataset Information

Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases.

Publications

Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets