Target Behavior: Healthy Eating, Food Insecurity/Food Assistance
Intervention Type: PSE Change
Intervention Reach and Adoption
Setting: Community (Live), Food pantries, Indian Tribal Organizations
Target Audience: Parents/Mothers/Fathers, Adults, Older Adults, Homeless/Food Pantry Clients
Race/Ethnicity: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Black or African American, White, Hispanic/Latino, and Non-Hispanic/Latino
The Food Council Scorecard and MyChoice Pantry Scorecard measure the degree of implementation of the intervention and directly correspond with the Food Council Creation Guide and Food Pantry Toolkit. The Food Council Scorecard and MyChoice Pantry Scorecard were designed to be completed prior to implementation in order to establish a baseline, and then used periodically thereafter to measure progress in implementing the intervention.
- Executive Summary
- Food Council Creation Guide
- Food Pantry Toolkit
- Food Council Scorecard
- MyChoice Pantry Scorecard
The Food Council Scorecard and MyChoice Pantry Scorecard accompany the guide and toolkit to serve as a practical, simple assessment tools.
Outcome evaluation of VFF showed that post-intervention, the proportion of food-insecure pantry clients was significantly lower in treatment versus comparison pantries (57% vs 64%, p=.003). Food insecurity did not differ between control and intervention pantry clients pre-intervention.
Publications on VFF can be found online:
Evidence-based Approach: Research-tested
|Readiness and Capacity – Short Term (ST)||Changes – Medium Term (MT)||Effectiveness and Maintenance – Long Term (LT)||Population Results (R)|
|Environmental Settings||ST5, ST6||LT5, LT9|
|Sectors of Influence||LT12|
- ST5b,c: Twelve sites conducted a needs assessment in which the results documented needs for changes in PSE supports. Twenty-four sites were assessed for organizational readiness for change.
- ST6a: Twelve champions advanced SNAP-Ed activities by providing leadership, promoting collaborations, and engaging in advocacy as a result of the intervention.
- LT5c: Eleven sites made at least one PSE change, and showed improvement in the degree of food council implementation via the Food Council Scorecard and degree of MyChoice implementation via the MyChoice Pantry Scorecard.
- ST8a-d: Eleven food policy councils were formed and active from 2014-2019 with diverse representation from food systems sectors including food pantries, grocers, health departments, Extension, local businesses, food pantry clients, and more as a result of the intervention.
- LT9b: Throughout 24 sites, both treatment and comparison, approximately $187,106.00 in mini-grant funds were awarded to participating communities.
- LT12a,h: Eleven food pantry councils conducted new activities specifically addressing the unique food system disparities within the selected counties as a result of the intervention. Eleven food pantries changed the system of offering to a guided-client choice model from a traditional pantry model as a result of the intervention.
- R6a: Pre-intervention, the proportion of food insecure pantry clients did not differ between treatment and comparison pantries (76% vs 79%, respectively; p=.21). Post-intervention, the proportion of food insecure pantry clients was significantly lower in treatment versus comparison pantries (57% vs 64%, p=.003).