The Experts below are selected from a list of 6810 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Karla L. Hanson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • models for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture co csa programs
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2021
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Mia Vaccaro, Diane Smith, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) appears to be a promising way to increase low-income households’ access and intake of fresh produce, while also helping CSA farms expand their farm business. Yet single farms operating CO-CSAs may struggle to balance the demands of farming with CO-CSA program administration, funding, and recruitment. To address these chal­lenges, CO-CSA programs operated by nonprofits have emerged, equipped with dedicated infrastruc­ture, resources, and staffing. This study aims to describe organizational models and best practices of nonprofit CO-CSA programs, using a qualitative approach. We conducted interviews with five well-established nonprofit CO-CSA programs in the U.S. Administration of these five nonprofit CO-CSAs took several forms: (1) providing direct sub­sidies to individual CO-CSA member farms; (2) functioning themselves as an aggregator, packer, and distributor of regional produce; and (3) sourcing from an in-house farm incubator or food hub, then packing and coordinating delivery to pick-up sites. Nonprofit CO-CSA funding strategies included grants from federal and local government sources, private donations, fundrais­ing, and grants. Marketing efforts occurred via social media, Community events, and word of mouth. Both fundraising and recruitment were greatly facilitated by relationships with Community partners. Having dedicated staff, as well as a com­munity that values local Agriculture and social jus­tice, were identified as success factors. This descriptive, qualitative study systematically com­pares the attributes of five nonprofit CO-CSA programs. Future research should focus on identifying the cost-effectiveness of nonprofit CO-CSAs, compare the relative merits of single-farm and nonprofit CO-CSAs, and quantify the eco­nomic benefit of CO-CSA programs for farmers and local communities.

  • o37 fruit and vegetable preparation changes during and after cost offset Community Supported Agriculture and nutrition education
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2021
    Co-Authors: Grace A Marshall, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Background Most adults and children in the US do not consume recommended levels of fruit and vegetables (FV). Providing subsidized or cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) alongside nutrition education is 1 approach to increase FV intake among rural, low-income families. Objective This analysis assessed change in the frequency and method of FV preparation during and after a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention. Study Design, Setting, Participants Participants were caregivers in low-income households ( Measurable Outcome/Analysis Outcomes included monthly frequency of preparing 9 different, seasonal FV for children's snacks and 6 different vegetables for dinner with preparation methods for each. Repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction tested change in FV preparation frequency over time at 95% confidence. Moderation analysis assessed whether changes in FV preparation frequency varied by lesson attendance. Results At baseline, caregivers prepared fruit for snacks and vegetables for dinner almost every day, and vegetables for snacks every other day. Preparation frequency for total snack fruit, celery, cucumber, peppers, other vegetables, total snack vegetables, lettuce, cabbage, greens, squash, and total dinner vegetables all increased during the intervention; and, increases in vegetables for both snacks (celery, cucumber, and total) and dinner (greens and total) were maintained one-year later. At baseline, the majority of participants (>70%) reported using healthy methods to prepare vegetables, and no changes were observed over time. Observed increases in FV preparation frequency were not moderated by lesson attendance. Conclusion CO-CSA plus education was associated with increases in FV preparation frequency, increases in vegetable preparation were maintained 1 year later, but improvements were not associated with attending nutrition education.

  • helping farmers with continuation planning for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture to low income families
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2020
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Kristin Bulpitt, Leah C Volpe, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    To improve low-income families’ access to fresh local produce, some farmers offer subsidized or “cost-offset” Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) shares. We evaluated a structured planning and implementation process conducted during the final intervention year of the Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) study, which aimed to help participating farmers (N=12) to sustain a CO-CSA program after study funding ended. The process included training webinars, planning tools to develop CO-CSA continuation funding and recruitment strategies, regional coach­ing teams to provide technical assistance, and peri­odic group conference calls to facilitate shared learning among F3HK farmers. Our evaluation explored the content of farmers’ CO-CSA contin­u­ation plans, their experiences during implementa­tion, their opinions about the planning process, and their future plans regarding their CO-CSA. We found that F3HK farmers used diverse methods to plan, recruit, and raise funds, with each farm adapt­ing strategies to fit their local conditions and farm business. Many farmers found success with word-of-mouth advertising and CSA member donations. Yet lack of farm resources—time, money, and ex­pertise—was a continual barrier to moving for­ward. As with full price CSAs, reciprocity was a key factor: farmers needed to consider the needs and preferences of low-income consumers, and CO-CSA members needed to understand their financial responsibility to the farmer. In general, F3HK farmers appreciated the continuation planning pro­cess, but expressed a desire for more technical assistance with grant writing. Farmers were com­mitted to the success of the CO-CSA continuation planning process, and most intended to continue the CO-CSA the following year.

  • perceptions of nutrition education classes offered in conjunction with a Community Supported Agriculture intervention among low income families
    Public Health Nutrition, 2020
    Co-Authors: Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Leah C Volpe, Emily H Belarmino, Liana Gonsalves
    Abstract:

    Objective To examine participants' experiences with nutrition education classes that were implemented with and designed to complement a cost-offset Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) programme. Design Qualitative analysis of data from twenty-eight focus groups with ninety-six participants enrolled in Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK). Transcribed data were coded and analysed by a priori and emergent themes. Setting Rural and micropolitan communities in New York, North Carolina, Vermont and Washington (USA). Participants Ninety-six F3HK participants. Results Participants found recipes and class activities helpful and reported improvements in nutrition knowledge, food preservation skills and home cooking behaviours for themselves and their children; they also reported that classes promoted a sense of Community. Some educators better incorporated CSA produce into lessons, which participants reported as beneficial. Other obligations and class logistics were barriers to attendance; participants recommended that lessons be offered multiple times weekly at different times of day. Other suggestions included lengthening class duration to encourage social engagement; emphasising recipes to incorporate that week's CSA produce and pantry staples and offering additional strategies to incorporate children in classes. Conclusion Complementing a cost-offset CSA with nutrition education may enhance programme benefits to low-income families by improving nutrition knowledge and cooking behaviours. However, future interventions will benefit from ongoing coordination between educators and local growing trajectories to maximise timely coverage of unfamiliar produce in lessons; synchronous scheduling of CSA pick-up and classes for participant convenience and creative strategies to engage children and/or provide childcare.

  • p104 theory informed predictors of fruit and vegetable intake among cost offset Community Supported Agriculture enrollees
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2020
    Co-Authors: Jennifer Garner, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Katherine Petro, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Background In cost-offset, Community-Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA), low-income households receive subsidized shares of locally-grown produce with the aim of improving their access to and consumption of fruits and vegetables (FV). Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a commonly leveraged behavior change theory and informed the design of a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention trial for low-income households. Objective To examine the cross-sectional relationships between SCT-related variables and FV intake among CO-CSA enrollees at baseline. We hypothesized that nutrition-related attitudes, beliefs, and self-efficacy as well as perceived FV availability and accessibility would be significant predictors of FV intake. Study Design, Setting, Participants In Spring 2016 and 2017, adult enrollees (n = 305) completed a baseline questionnaire containing study-specific and validated questions to measure nutrition-related psychosocial (knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs), environmental (FV availability and accessibility), and behavioral factors (self-efficacy) in relation to self-reported and proxy measures of FV intake (National Cancer Institute's All-Day FV Screener and resonance Raman spectroscopy to assess dermal carotenoid status). Measurable Outcome/Analysis Descriptive statistics and multiple regression models were completed in SPSS. Models controlled for demographic characteristics. Self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV (β = 0.27, P ≤ .001) and in-home FV availability (β = 0.13, P = .04) were significant predictors of self-reported daily FV intake (R2 = 0.121, P ≤ .001). In-home FV availability (β = 0.20, P ≤ .001), accurate knowledge of FV recommendations (β = 0.15, P = .008), and perceived geographic access to FV (β = 0.11, P = .046) were significant predictors of carotenoid status (R2 = 0.227, P ≤ .001). Conclusions Among a set of SCT-related variables, knowledge of FV recommendations, geographic access to FV, in-home availability of FV, and self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV were significant predictors of FV intake. However, these only explained 22-23% of outcome variability among a sample of CO-CSA adult enrollees. SCT alone may not be the most appropriate theory through which to understand potential levers of FV intake among adults participating in CO-CSA programs.

Rebecca A Seguin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • o37 fruit and vegetable preparation changes during and after cost offset Community Supported Agriculture and nutrition education
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2021
    Co-Authors: Grace A Marshall, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Background Most adults and children in the US do not consume recommended levels of fruit and vegetables (FV). Providing subsidized or cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) alongside nutrition education is 1 approach to increase FV intake among rural, low-income families. Objective This analysis assessed change in the frequency and method of FV preparation during and after a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention. Study Design, Setting, Participants Participants were caregivers in low-income households ( Measurable Outcome/Analysis Outcomes included monthly frequency of preparing 9 different, seasonal FV for children's snacks and 6 different vegetables for dinner with preparation methods for each. Repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction tested change in FV preparation frequency over time at 95% confidence. Moderation analysis assessed whether changes in FV preparation frequency varied by lesson attendance. Results At baseline, caregivers prepared fruit for snacks and vegetables for dinner almost every day, and vegetables for snacks every other day. Preparation frequency for total snack fruit, celery, cucumber, peppers, other vegetables, total snack vegetables, lettuce, cabbage, greens, squash, and total dinner vegetables all increased during the intervention; and, increases in vegetables for both snacks (celery, cucumber, and total) and dinner (greens and total) were maintained one-year later. At baseline, the majority of participants (>70%) reported using healthy methods to prepare vegetables, and no changes were observed over time. Observed increases in FV preparation frequency were not moderated by lesson attendance. Conclusion CO-CSA plus education was associated with increases in FV preparation frequency, increases in vegetable preparation were maintained 1 year later, but improvements were not associated with attending nutrition education.

  • a modified choice experiment to examine willingness to participate in a Community Supported Agriculture csa program among low income parents
    Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 2020
    Co-Authors: Jared T. Mcguirt, Karla L. Hanson, Jane Kolodinsky, Rebecca A Seguin, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Florence Becot, Molly Demarco, Alice S. Ammerman
    Abstract:

    There is a need to improve geographical and financial access to healthy foods for limited resource populations in rural areas. Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs can improve access to healthy foods in rural and limited-resource populations. However, research is needed to discern the most appealing conditions for a CSA (e.g. price, frequency, food quantity) among rural, low-income customers. The goal of this study was to understand low-income consumers' preferences related to participation in a CSA program, considering price, frequency, food quantity and accessibility (e.g. distance) conditions. A modified exploratory choice experiment exercise was embedded within in-depth interviews to examine willingness to participate in CSA under a variety of conditions among 42 low-income adults with at least one child in the household in North Carolina, New York, Vermont and Washington. Willingness to participate in a CSA under each condition was summed and compared across conditions. Results were stratified by race, number of children and household members and McNemar's test and Student's t-test were used to examine differences in willingness between conditions. Salient quotes were extracted to support themes related to each condition. Our analysis suggests that the ideal CSA would be a full-sized share of eight to nine items of mixed variety, distributed every other week, priced at less than US$15, no more than 10 min further than the supermarket (SM) from their home and preferably less expensive but no more than 20% more expensive than SM prices. CSAs interested in reaching rural low-income populations may benefit from considering these consumer-level preferences.

  • the perceived influence of cost offset Community Supported Agriculture on food access among low income families
    Public Health Nutrition, 2018
    Co-Authors: Michelle J White, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jared T. Mcguirt, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Emily H Morgan, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Objective To examine perspectives on food access among low-income families participating in a cost-offset Community-Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) programme. Design Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) is a multicentre randomized intervention trial assessing the effect of CO-CSA on dietary intake and quality among children from low-income families. Focus groups were conducted at the end of the first CO-CSA season. Participants were interviewed about programme experiences, framed by five dimensions of food access: availability, accessibility, affordability, acceptability and accommodation. Transcribed data were coded on these dimensions plus emergent themes. Setting Nine communities in the US states of New York, North Carolina, Washington and Vermont. Subjects Fifty-three F3HK adults with children. Results CSA models were structured by partner farms. Produce quantity was abundant; however, availability was enhanced for participants who were able to select their own produce items. Flexible CSA pick-up times and locations made produce pick-up more accessible. Despite being affordable to most, payment timing was a barrier for some. Unfamiliar foods and quick spoilage hindered acceptability through challenging meal planning, despite accommodations that included preparation advice. Conclusions Although CO-CSA may facilitate increased access to fruits and vegetables for low-income families, perceptions of positive diet change may be limited by the ability to incorporate share pick-up into regular travel patterns and meal planning. Food waste concerns may be particularly acute for families with constrained resources. Future research should examine whether CO-CSA with flexible logistics and produce self-selection are sustainable for low-income families and CSA farms.

  • adults and children in low income households that participate in cost offset Community Supported Agriculture have high fruit and vegetable consumption
    Nutrients, 2017
    Co-Authors: Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Emily H Morgan, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    This paper examines fruit and vegetable intake (FVI) in low-income households that participated in a cost-offset (CO), or 50% subsidized, Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) program. CSA customers paid farms upfront for a share of the harvest, and received produce weekly throughout the growing season. A cohort of adults and children 2–12 y in a summer CO-CSA were surveyed online twice: August 2015 (n = 41) and February 2016 (n = 23). FVI was measured by the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Fruit and Vegetable Screener (FVS) and an inventory of locally grown fruits and vegetables. FVI relative to United States (US) recommendations and averages, and across seasons, were tested with non-parametric tests and paired t-tests (p < 0.05). Both adults and children in the CO-CSA had higher FVI than the US averages, and more often met recommendations for vegetables. Some summer fruits and vegetables were more often eaten when locally in-season. The CO-CSA model warrants further examination as an avenue for improving vegetable consumption among adults and children in low-income households. However, causality between CO-CSA participation and FVI cannot be inferred, as CO-CSA participants may be positive deviants with respect to FVI. A multi-state randomized controlled trial is currently underway to evaluate impacts of CO-CSAs on FVI and related outcomes.

  • farm fresh foods for healthy kids f3hk an innovative Community Supported Agriculture intervention to prevent childhood obesity in low income families and strengthen local agricultural economies
    BMC Public Health, 2017
    Co-Authors: Rebecca A Seguin, Karla L. Hanson, Leah M. Connor, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Emily H Morgan, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Florence Becot, Jennifer Garner
    Abstract:

    Childhood obesity persists in the United States and is associated with serious health problems. Higher rates of obesity among children from disadvantaged households may be, in part, attributable to disparities in access to healthy foods such as fruits and vegetables. Community Supported Agriculture can improve access to and consumption of fresh produce, but the upfront payment structure, logistical barriers, and unfamiliarity with produce items may inhibit participation by low-income families. The aim of this project is to assess the impact of subsidized, or “cost-offset,” Community Supported Agriculture participation coupled with tailored nutrition education for low-income families with children. The Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids Community-based, randomized intervention trial will build on formative and longitudinal research to examine the impact of cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture on diet and other health behaviors as well as the economic impacts on local economies. The intervention will involve reduced-price Community Supported Agriculture shares which can be paid for on a weekly basis, nine skill-based and seasonally-tailored healthy eating classes, and the provision of basic kitchen tools. Low income families with at least one child aged 2–12 years will be recruited to join existing Community Supported Agriculture programs in New York, North Carolina, Vermont, and Washington. In each program, families will be randomized 1:1 to intervention or delayed intervention groups. Data will be collected at baseline, and in the fall and spring for 3 years. The primary outcomes are children’s intake of fruits and vegetables and foods high in sugar and/or (solid) fat, as well as diet quality; secondary outcomes include physical, behavioral, psychosocial, and environmental variables. Cost-effectiveness and economic impact at the farm and Community levels also will be assessed. This integrated project will provide important information and contribute to the evidence base regarding the use of local agricultural interventions to improve children’s dietary behaviors and weight maintenance. Findings also will inform the development of a toolkit for farmers and education modules related to local food system innovations for undergraduate and graduate students. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02770196 . Registered 5 April 2016.

Jane Kolodinsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • models for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture co csa programs
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2021
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Mia Vaccaro, Diane Smith, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) appears to be a promising way to increase low-income households’ access and intake of fresh produce, while also helping CSA farms expand their farm business. Yet single farms operating CO-CSAs may struggle to balance the demands of farming with CO-CSA program administration, funding, and recruitment. To address these chal­lenges, CO-CSA programs operated by nonprofits have emerged, equipped with dedicated infrastruc­ture, resources, and staffing. This study aims to describe organizational models and best practices of nonprofit CO-CSA programs, using a qualitative approach. We conducted interviews with five well-established nonprofit CO-CSA programs in the U.S. Administration of these five nonprofit CO-CSAs took several forms: (1) providing direct sub­sidies to individual CO-CSA member farms; (2) functioning themselves as an aggregator, packer, and distributor of regional produce; and (3) sourcing from an in-house farm incubator or food hub, then packing and coordinating delivery to pick-up sites. Nonprofit CO-CSA funding strategies included grants from federal and local government sources, private donations, fundrais­ing, and grants. Marketing efforts occurred via social media, Community events, and word of mouth. Both fundraising and recruitment were greatly facilitated by relationships with Community partners. Having dedicated staff, as well as a com­munity that values local Agriculture and social jus­tice, were identified as success factors. This descriptive, qualitative study systematically com­pares the attributes of five nonprofit CO-CSA programs. Future research should focus on identifying the cost-effectiveness of nonprofit CO-CSAs, compare the relative merits of single-farm and nonprofit CO-CSAs, and quantify the eco­nomic benefit of CO-CSA programs for farmers and local communities.

  • o37 fruit and vegetable preparation changes during and after cost offset Community Supported Agriculture and nutrition education
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2021
    Co-Authors: Grace A Marshall, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Background Most adults and children in the US do not consume recommended levels of fruit and vegetables (FV). Providing subsidized or cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) alongside nutrition education is 1 approach to increase FV intake among rural, low-income families. Objective This analysis assessed change in the frequency and method of FV preparation during and after a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention. Study Design, Setting, Participants Participants were caregivers in low-income households ( Measurable Outcome/Analysis Outcomes included monthly frequency of preparing 9 different, seasonal FV for children's snacks and 6 different vegetables for dinner with preparation methods for each. Repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction tested change in FV preparation frequency over time at 95% confidence. Moderation analysis assessed whether changes in FV preparation frequency varied by lesson attendance. Results At baseline, caregivers prepared fruit for snacks and vegetables for dinner almost every day, and vegetables for snacks every other day. Preparation frequency for total snack fruit, celery, cucumber, peppers, other vegetables, total snack vegetables, lettuce, cabbage, greens, squash, and total dinner vegetables all increased during the intervention; and, increases in vegetables for both snacks (celery, cucumber, and total) and dinner (greens and total) were maintained one-year later. At baseline, the majority of participants (>70%) reported using healthy methods to prepare vegetables, and no changes were observed over time. Observed increases in FV preparation frequency were not moderated by lesson attendance. Conclusion CO-CSA plus education was associated with increases in FV preparation frequency, increases in vegetable preparation were maintained 1 year later, but improvements were not associated with attending nutrition education.

  • helping farmers with continuation planning for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture to low income families
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2020
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Kristin Bulpitt, Leah C Volpe, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    To improve low-income families’ access to fresh local produce, some farmers offer subsidized or “cost-offset” Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) shares. We evaluated a structured planning and implementation process conducted during the final intervention year of the Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) study, which aimed to help participating farmers (N=12) to sustain a CO-CSA program after study funding ended. The process included training webinars, planning tools to develop CO-CSA continuation funding and recruitment strategies, regional coach­ing teams to provide technical assistance, and peri­odic group conference calls to facilitate shared learning among F3HK farmers. Our evaluation explored the content of farmers’ CO-CSA contin­u­ation plans, their experiences during implementa­tion, their opinions about the planning process, and their future plans regarding their CO-CSA. We found that F3HK farmers used diverse methods to plan, recruit, and raise funds, with each farm adapt­ing strategies to fit their local conditions and farm business. Many farmers found success with word-of-mouth advertising and CSA member donations. Yet lack of farm resources—time, money, and ex­pertise—was a continual barrier to moving for­ward. As with full price CSAs, reciprocity was a key factor: farmers needed to consider the needs and preferences of low-income consumers, and CO-CSA members needed to understand their financial responsibility to the farmer. In general, F3HK farmers appreciated the continuation planning pro­cess, but expressed a desire for more technical assistance with grant writing. Farmers were com­mitted to the success of the CO-CSA continuation planning process, and most intended to continue the CO-CSA the following year.

  • perceptions of nutrition education classes offered in conjunction with a Community Supported Agriculture intervention among low income families
    Public Health Nutrition, 2020
    Co-Authors: Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Leah C Volpe, Emily H Belarmino, Liana Gonsalves
    Abstract:

    Objective To examine participants' experiences with nutrition education classes that were implemented with and designed to complement a cost-offset Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) programme. Design Qualitative analysis of data from twenty-eight focus groups with ninety-six participants enrolled in Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK). Transcribed data were coded and analysed by a priori and emergent themes. Setting Rural and micropolitan communities in New York, North Carolina, Vermont and Washington (USA). Participants Ninety-six F3HK participants. Results Participants found recipes and class activities helpful and reported improvements in nutrition knowledge, food preservation skills and home cooking behaviours for themselves and their children; they also reported that classes promoted a sense of Community. Some educators better incorporated CSA produce into lessons, which participants reported as beneficial. Other obligations and class logistics were barriers to attendance; participants recommended that lessons be offered multiple times weekly at different times of day. Other suggestions included lengthening class duration to encourage social engagement; emphasising recipes to incorporate that week's CSA produce and pantry staples and offering additional strategies to incorporate children in classes. Conclusion Complementing a cost-offset CSA with nutrition education may enhance programme benefits to low-income families by improving nutrition knowledge and cooking behaviours. However, future interventions will benefit from ongoing coordination between educators and local growing trajectories to maximise timely coverage of unfamiliar produce in lessons; synchronous scheduling of CSA pick-up and classes for participant convenience and creative strategies to engage children and/or provide childcare.

  • p104 theory informed predictors of fruit and vegetable intake among cost offset Community Supported Agriculture enrollees
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2020
    Co-Authors: Jennifer Garner, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Katherine Petro, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Background In cost-offset, Community-Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA), low-income households receive subsidized shares of locally-grown produce with the aim of improving their access to and consumption of fruits and vegetables (FV). Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a commonly leveraged behavior change theory and informed the design of a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention trial for low-income households. Objective To examine the cross-sectional relationships between SCT-related variables and FV intake among CO-CSA enrollees at baseline. We hypothesized that nutrition-related attitudes, beliefs, and self-efficacy as well as perceived FV availability and accessibility would be significant predictors of FV intake. Study Design, Setting, Participants In Spring 2016 and 2017, adult enrollees (n = 305) completed a baseline questionnaire containing study-specific and validated questions to measure nutrition-related psychosocial (knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs), environmental (FV availability and accessibility), and behavioral factors (self-efficacy) in relation to self-reported and proxy measures of FV intake (National Cancer Institute's All-Day FV Screener and resonance Raman spectroscopy to assess dermal carotenoid status). Measurable Outcome/Analysis Descriptive statistics and multiple regression models were completed in SPSS. Models controlled for demographic characteristics. Self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV (β = 0.27, P ≤ .001) and in-home FV availability (β = 0.13, P = .04) were significant predictors of self-reported daily FV intake (R2 = 0.121, P ≤ .001). In-home FV availability (β = 0.20, P ≤ .001), accurate knowledge of FV recommendations (β = 0.15, P = .008), and perceived geographic access to FV (β = 0.11, P = .046) were significant predictors of carotenoid status (R2 = 0.227, P ≤ .001). Conclusions Among a set of SCT-related variables, knowledge of FV recommendations, geographic access to FV, in-home availability of FV, and self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV were significant predictors of FV intake. However, these only explained 22-23% of outcome variability among a sample of CO-CSA adult enrollees. SCT alone may not be the most appropriate theory through which to understand potential levers of FV intake among adults participating in CO-CSA programs.

Marilyn Sitaker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • models for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture co csa programs
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2021
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Mia Vaccaro, Diane Smith, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) appears to be a promising way to increase low-income households’ access and intake of fresh produce, while also helping CSA farms expand their farm business. Yet single farms operating CO-CSAs may struggle to balance the demands of farming with CO-CSA program administration, funding, and recruitment. To address these chal­lenges, CO-CSA programs operated by nonprofits have emerged, equipped with dedicated infrastruc­ture, resources, and staffing. This study aims to describe organizational models and best practices of nonprofit CO-CSA programs, using a qualitative approach. We conducted interviews with five well-established nonprofit CO-CSA programs in the U.S. Administration of these five nonprofit CO-CSAs took several forms: (1) providing direct sub­sidies to individual CO-CSA member farms; (2) functioning themselves as an aggregator, packer, and distributor of regional produce; and (3) sourcing from an in-house farm incubator or food hub, then packing and coordinating delivery to pick-up sites. Nonprofit CO-CSA funding strategies included grants from federal and local government sources, private donations, fundrais­ing, and grants. Marketing efforts occurred via social media, Community events, and word of mouth. Both fundraising and recruitment were greatly facilitated by relationships with Community partners. Having dedicated staff, as well as a com­munity that values local Agriculture and social jus­tice, were identified as success factors. This descriptive, qualitative study systematically com­pares the attributes of five nonprofit CO-CSA programs. Future research should focus on identifying the cost-effectiveness of nonprofit CO-CSAs, compare the relative merits of single-farm and nonprofit CO-CSAs, and quantify the eco­nomic benefit of CO-CSA programs for farmers and local communities.

  • o37 fruit and vegetable preparation changes during and after cost offset Community Supported Agriculture and nutrition education
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2021
    Co-Authors: Grace A Marshall, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Background Most adults and children in the US do not consume recommended levels of fruit and vegetables (FV). Providing subsidized or cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) alongside nutrition education is 1 approach to increase FV intake among rural, low-income families. Objective This analysis assessed change in the frequency and method of FV preparation during and after a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention. Study Design, Setting, Participants Participants were caregivers in low-income households ( Measurable Outcome/Analysis Outcomes included monthly frequency of preparing 9 different, seasonal FV for children's snacks and 6 different vegetables for dinner with preparation methods for each. Repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction tested change in FV preparation frequency over time at 95% confidence. Moderation analysis assessed whether changes in FV preparation frequency varied by lesson attendance. Results At baseline, caregivers prepared fruit for snacks and vegetables for dinner almost every day, and vegetables for snacks every other day. Preparation frequency for total snack fruit, celery, cucumber, peppers, other vegetables, total snack vegetables, lettuce, cabbage, greens, squash, and total dinner vegetables all increased during the intervention; and, increases in vegetables for both snacks (celery, cucumber, and total) and dinner (greens and total) were maintained one-year later. At baseline, the majority of participants (>70%) reported using healthy methods to prepare vegetables, and no changes were observed over time. Observed increases in FV preparation frequency were not moderated by lesson attendance. Conclusion CO-CSA plus education was associated with increases in FV preparation frequency, increases in vegetable preparation were maintained 1 year later, but improvements were not associated with attending nutrition education.

  • helping farmers with continuation planning for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture to low income families
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2020
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Kristin Bulpitt, Leah C Volpe, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    To improve low-income families’ access to fresh local produce, some farmers offer subsidized or “cost-offset” Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) shares. We evaluated a structured planning and implementation process conducted during the final intervention year of the Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) study, which aimed to help participating farmers (N=12) to sustain a CO-CSA program after study funding ended. The process included training webinars, planning tools to develop CO-CSA continuation funding and recruitment strategies, regional coach­ing teams to provide technical assistance, and peri­odic group conference calls to facilitate shared learning among F3HK farmers. Our evaluation explored the content of farmers’ CO-CSA contin­u­ation plans, their experiences during implementa­tion, their opinions about the planning process, and their future plans regarding their CO-CSA. We found that F3HK farmers used diverse methods to plan, recruit, and raise funds, with each farm adapt­ing strategies to fit their local conditions and farm business. Many farmers found success with word-of-mouth advertising and CSA member donations. Yet lack of farm resources—time, money, and ex­pertise—was a continual barrier to moving for­ward. As with full price CSAs, reciprocity was a key factor: farmers needed to consider the needs and preferences of low-income consumers, and CO-CSA members needed to understand their financial responsibility to the farmer. In general, F3HK farmers appreciated the continuation planning pro­cess, but expressed a desire for more technical assistance with grant writing. Farmers were com­mitted to the success of the CO-CSA continuation planning process, and most intended to continue the CO-CSA the following year.

  • perceptions of nutrition education classes offered in conjunction with a Community Supported Agriculture intervention among low income families
    Public Health Nutrition, 2020
    Co-Authors: Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Leah C Volpe, Emily H Belarmino, Liana Gonsalves
    Abstract:

    Objective To examine participants' experiences with nutrition education classes that were implemented with and designed to complement a cost-offset Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) programme. Design Qualitative analysis of data from twenty-eight focus groups with ninety-six participants enrolled in Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK). Transcribed data were coded and analysed by a priori and emergent themes. Setting Rural and micropolitan communities in New York, North Carolina, Vermont and Washington (USA). Participants Ninety-six F3HK participants. Results Participants found recipes and class activities helpful and reported improvements in nutrition knowledge, food preservation skills and home cooking behaviours for themselves and their children; they also reported that classes promoted a sense of Community. Some educators better incorporated CSA produce into lessons, which participants reported as beneficial. Other obligations and class logistics were barriers to attendance; participants recommended that lessons be offered multiple times weekly at different times of day. Other suggestions included lengthening class duration to encourage social engagement; emphasising recipes to incorporate that week's CSA produce and pantry staples and offering additional strategies to incorporate children in classes. Conclusion Complementing a cost-offset CSA with nutrition education may enhance programme benefits to low-income families by improving nutrition knowledge and cooking behaviours. However, future interventions will benefit from ongoing coordination between educators and local growing trajectories to maximise timely coverage of unfamiliar produce in lessons; synchronous scheduling of CSA pick-up and classes for participant convenience and creative strategies to engage children and/or provide childcare.

  • p104 theory informed predictors of fruit and vegetable intake among cost offset Community Supported Agriculture enrollees
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2020
    Co-Authors: Jennifer Garner, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Katherine Petro, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Background In cost-offset, Community-Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA), low-income households receive subsidized shares of locally-grown produce with the aim of improving their access to and consumption of fruits and vegetables (FV). Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a commonly leveraged behavior change theory and informed the design of a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention trial for low-income households. Objective To examine the cross-sectional relationships between SCT-related variables and FV intake among CO-CSA enrollees at baseline. We hypothesized that nutrition-related attitudes, beliefs, and self-efficacy as well as perceived FV availability and accessibility would be significant predictors of FV intake. Study Design, Setting, Participants In Spring 2016 and 2017, adult enrollees (n = 305) completed a baseline questionnaire containing study-specific and validated questions to measure nutrition-related psychosocial (knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs), environmental (FV availability and accessibility), and behavioral factors (self-efficacy) in relation to self-reported and proxy measures of FV intake (National Cancer Institute's All-Day FV Screener and resonance Raman spectroscopy to assess dermal carotenoid status). Measurable Outcome/Analysis Descriptive statistics and multiple regression models were completed in SPSS. Models controlled for demographic characteristics. Self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV (β = 0.27, P ≤ .001) and in-home FV availability (β = 0.13, P = .04) were significant predictors of self-reported daily FV intake (R2 = 0.121, P ≤ .001). In-home FV availability (β = 0.20, P ≤ .001), accurate knowledge of FV recommendations (β = 0.15, P = .008), and perceived geographic access to FV (β = 0.11, P = .046) were significant predictors of carotenoid status (R2 = 0.227, P ≤ .001). Conclusions Among a set of SCT-related variables, knowledge of FV recommendations, geographic access to FV, in-home availability of FV, and self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV were significant predictors of FV intake. However, these only explained 22-23% of outcome variability among a sample of CO-CSA adult enrollees. SCT alone may not be the most appropriate theory through which to understand potential levers of FV intake among adults participating in CO-CSA programs.

Alice S. Ammerman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • models for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture co csa programs
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2021
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Mia Vaccaro, Diane Smith, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) appears to be a promising way to increase low-income households’ access and intake of fresh produce, while also helping CSA farms expand their farm business. Yet single farms operating CO-CSAs may struggle to balance the demands of farming with CO-CSA program administration, funding, and recruitment. To address these chal­lenges, CO-CSA programs operated by nonprofits have emerged, equipped with dedicated infrastruc­ture, resources, and staffing. This study aims to describe organizational models and best practices of nonprofit CO-CSA programs, using a qualitative approach. We conducted interviews with five well-established nonprofit CO-CSA programs in the U.S. Administration of these five nonprofit CO-CSAs took several forms: (1) providing direct sub­sidies to individual CO-CSA member farms; (2) functioning themselves as an aggregator, packer, and distributor of regional produce; and (3) sourcing from an in-house farm incubator or food hub, then packing and coordinating delivery to pick-up sites. Nonprofit CO-CSA funding strategies included grants from federal and local government sources, private donations, fundrais­ing, and grants. Marketing efforts occurred via social media, Community events, and word of mouth. Both fundraising and recruitment were greatly facilitated by relationships with Community partners. Having dedicated staff, as well as a com­munity that values local Agriculture and social jus­tice, were identified as success factors. This descriptive, qualitative study systematically com­pares the attributes of five nonprofit CO-CSA programs. Future research should focus on identifying the cost-effectiveness of nonprofit CO-CSAs, compare the relative merits of single-farm and nonprofit CO-CSAs, and quantify the eco­nomic benefit of CO-CSA programs for farmers and local communities.

  • o37 fruit and vegetable preparation changes during and after cost offset Community Supported Agriculture and nutrition education
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2021
    Co-Authors: Grace A Marshall, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Rebecca A Seguin
    Abstract:

    Background Most adults and children in the US do not consume recommended levels of fruit and vegetables (FV). Providing subsidized or cost-offset Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) alongside nutrition education is 1 approach to increase FV intake among rural, low-income families. Objective This analysis assessed change in the frequency and method of FV preparation during and after a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention. Study Design, Setting, Participants Participants were caregivers in low-income households ( Measurable Outcome/Analysis Outcomes included monthly frequency of preparing 9 different, seasonal FV for children's snacks and 6 different vegetables for dinner with preparation methods for each. Repeated measures ANOVA and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction tested change in FV preparation frequency over time at 95% confidence. Moderation analysis assessed whether changes in FV preparation frequency varied by lesson attendance. Results At baseline, caregivers prepared fruit for snacks and vegetables for dinner almost every day, and vegetables for snacks every other day. Preparation frequency for total snack fruit, celery, cucumber, peppers, other vegetables, total snack vegetables, lettuce, cabbage, greens, squash, and total dinner vegetables all increased during the intervention; and, increases in vegetables for both snacks (celery, cucumber, and total) and dinner (greens and total) were maintained one-year later. At baseline, the majority of participants (>70%) reported using healthy methods to prepare vegetables, and no changes were observed over time. Observed increases in FV preparation frequency were not moderated by lesson attendance. Conclusion CO-CSA plus education was associated with increases in FV preparation frequency, increases in vegetable preparation were maintained 1 year later, but improvements were not associated with attending nutrition education.

  • helping farmers with continuation planning for cost offset Community Supported Agriculture to low income families
    The Journal of Agriculture Food Systems and Community Development, 2020
    Co-Authors: Marilyn Sitaker, Karla L. Hanson, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Mackenzie Mccall, Kristin Bulpitt, Leah C Volpe, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    To improve low-income families’ access to fresh local produce, some farmers offer subsidized or “cost-offset” Community Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA) shares. We evaluated a structured planning and implementation process conducted during the final intervention year of the Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) study, which aimed to help participating farmers (N=12) to sustain a CO-CSA program after study funding ended. The process included training webinars, planning tools to develop CO-CSA continuation funding and recruitment strategies, regional coach­ing teams to provide technical assistance, and peri­odic group conference calls to facilitate shared learning among F3HK farmers. Our evaluation explored the content of farmers’ CO-CSA contin­u­ation plans, their experiences during implementa­tion, their opinions about the planning process, and their future plans regarding their CO-CSA. We found that F3HK farmers used diverse methods to plan, recruit, and raise funds, with each farm adapt­ing strategies to fit their local conditions and farm business. Many farmers found success with word-of-mouth advertising and CSA member donations. Yet lack of farm resources—time, money, and ex­pertise—was a continual barrier to moving for­ward. As with full price CSAs, reciprocity was a key factor: farmers needed to consider the needs and preferences of low-income consumers, and CO-CSA members needed to understand their financial responsibility to the farmer. In general, F3HK farmers appreciated the continuation planning pro­cess, but expressed a desire for more technical assistance with grant writing. Farmers were com­mitted to the success of the CO-CSA continuation planning process, and most intended to continue the CO-CSA the following year.

  • perceptions of nutrition education classes offered in conjunction with a Community Supported Agriculture intervention among low income families
    Public Health Nutrition, 2020
    Co-Authors: Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Jennifer Garner, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Weiwei Wang, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Leah C Volpe, Emily H Belarmino, Liana Gonsalves
    Abstract:

    Objective To examine participants' experiences with nutrition education classes that were implemented with and designed to complement a cost-offset Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) programme. Design Qualitative analysis of data from twenty-eight focus groups with ninety-six participants enrolled in Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK). Transcribed data were coded and analysed by a priori and emergent themes. Setting Rural and micropolitan communities in New York, North Carolina, Vermont and Washington (USA). Participants Ninety-six F3HK participants. Results Participants found recipes and class activities helpful and reported improvements in nutrition knowledge, food preservation skills and home cooking behaviours for themselves and their children; they also reported that classes promoted a sense of Community. Some educators better incorporated CSA produce into lessons, which participants reported as beneficial. Other obligations and class logistics were barriers to attendance; participants recommended that lessons be offered multiple times weekly at different times of day. Other suggestions included lengthening class duration to encourage social engagement; emphasising recipes to incorporate that week's CSA produce and pantry staples and offering additional strategies to incorporate children in classes. Conclusion Complementing a cost-offset CSA with nutrition education may enhance programme benefits to low-income families by improving nutrition knowledge and cooking behaviours. However, future interventions will benefit from ongoing coordination between educators and local growing trajectories to maximise timely coverage of unfamiliar produce in lessons; synchronous scheduling of CSA pick-up and classes for participant convenience and creative strategies to engage children and/or provide childcare.

  • p104 theory informed predictors of fruit and vegetable intake among cost offset Community Supported Agriculture enrollees
    Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 2020
    Co-Authors: Jennifer Garner, Karla L. Hanson, Marilyn Sitaker, Alice S. Ammerman, Jane Kolodinsky, Stephanie Jilcott B Pitts, Katherine Petro, Rebecca Seguinfowler
    Abstract:

    Background In cost-offset, Community-Supported Agriculture (CO-CSA), low-income households receive subsidized shares of locally-grown produce with the aim of improving their access to and consumption of fruits and vegetables (FV). Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a commonly leveraged behavior change theory and informed the design of a CO-CSA plus nutrition education intervention trial for low-income households. Objective To examine the cross-sectional relationships between SCT-related variables and FV intake among CO-CSA enrollees at baseline. We hypothesized that nutrition-related attitudes, beliefs, and self-efficacy as well as perceived FV availability and accessibility would be significant predictors of FV intake. Study Design, Setting, Participants In Spring 2016 and 2017, adult enrollees (n = 305) completed a baseline questionnaire containing study-specific and validated questions to measure nutrition-related psychosocial (knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs), environmental (FV availability and accessibility), and behavioral factors (self-efficacy) in relation to self-reported and proxy measures of FV intake (National Cancer Institute's All-Day FV Screener and resonance Raman spectroscopy to assess dermal carotenoid status). Measurable Outcome/Analysis Descriptive statistics and multiple regression models were completed in SPSS. Models controlled for demographic characteristics. Self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV (β = 0.27, P ≤ .001) and in-home FV availability (β = 0.13, P = .04) were significant predictors of self-reported daily FV intake (R2 = 0.121, P ≤ .001). In-home FV availability (β = 0.20, P ≤ .001), accurate knowledge of FV recommendations (β = 0.15, P = .008), and perceived geographic access to FV (β = 0.11, P = .046) were significant predictors of carotenoid status (R2 = 0.227, P ≤ .001). Conclusions Among a set of SCT-related variables, knowledge of FV recommendations, geographic access to FV, in-home availability of FV, and self-efficacy to prepare and eat FV were significant predictors of FV intake. However, these only explained 22-23% of outcome variability among a sample of CO-CSA adult enrollees. SCT alone may not be the most appropriate theory through which to understand potential levers of FV intake among adults participating in CO-CSA programs.