Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Aug 31;18(1):112.
doi: 10.1186/s12966-021-01168-x.

Community supported agriculture plus nutrition education improves skills, self-efficacy, and eating behaviors among low-income caregivers but not their children: a randomized controlled trial

Rebecca A Seguin-Fowler  1 , Karla L Hanson  2 , Stephanie B Jilcott Pitts  3 , Jane Kolodinsky  4 , Marilyn Sitaker  5 , Alice S Ammerman  6 , Grace A Marshall  7 , Emily H Belarmino  8 , Jennifer A Garner  9 , Weiwei Wang  10
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Community supported agriculture plus nutrition education improves skills, self-efficacy, and eating behaviors among low-income caregivers but not their children: a randomized controlled trial

Rebecca A Seguin-Fowler et al. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. .

Abstract

Background: Adults and children in the U.S. consume inadequate quantities of fruit and vegetables (FV), in part, due to poor access among households with lower socioeconomic status. One approach to improving access to FV is community supported agriculture (CSA) in which households purchase a 'share' of local farm produce throughout the growing season. This study examined the effects of cost-offset (half-price) CSA plus tailored nutrition education for low-income households with children.

Methods: The Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK) randomized controlled trial in New York, North Carolina, Vermont, and Washington (2016-2018) assigned caregiver-child dyads (n = 305) into cost-offset CSA plus education intervention or control (delayed intervention) groups. Following one growing season of CSA participation, changes in children's diet quality, body mass index (BMI), and physical activity; caregivers' nutrition knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and diet quality; and household food access and security were examined using multiple linear or logistic regression, with adjustment for baseline value within an intent-to-treat (ITT) framework in which missing data were multiply imputed.

Results: No significant net effects on children's dietary intake, BMI, or physical activity were observed. Statistically significant net improvements were observed after one growing season for caregivers' cooking attitudes, skills, and self-efficacy; FV intake and skin carotenoid levels; and household food security. Changes in attitudes and self-efficacy remained one-year after baseline, but improvements in caregiver diet and household food security did not. The number of weeks that participants picked up a CSA share (but not number of education sessions attended) was associated with improvements in caregiver FV intake and household food security.

Conclusions: Cost-offset CSA plus tailored nutrition education for low-income households improved important caregiver and household outcomes within just one season of participation; most notably, both self-reported and objectively measured caregiver FV intake and household food security improved. Households that picked up more shares also reported larger improvements. However, these changes were not maintained after the CSA season ended. These results suggest that cost-offset CSA is a viable approach to improving adult, but not child, FV intake and household food security for low-income families, but the seasonality of most CSAs may limit their potential to improve year-round dietary behavior and food security.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov . NCT02770196 . Registered 5 April 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Attitudes; Community supported agriculture; Cost-offset; Food security; Fruit and vegetable eating behaviors; Low income populations; Skin carotenoids; Subsidized.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement diagram showing study flow for Farm Fresh Foods for Healthy Kids (F3HK)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Slavin JL, Lloyd B. Health benefits of fruits and vegetables. Adv Nutr. 2012;3(4):506–516. doi: 10.3945/an.112.002154. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee-Kwan SH, Moore LV, Blanck HM, Harris DM, Galuska D. Disparities in state-specific adult fruit and vegetable consumption - United States, 2015. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66(45):1241–7. 10.15585/mmwr.mm6645a1. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moore LV, Dodd KW, Thompson FE, Grimm KA, Kim SA, Scanlon KS. Using behavioral risk factor surveillance system data to estimate the percentage of the population meeting US Department of Agriculture food patterns fruit and vegetable intake recommendations. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;181(12):979–88. 10.1093/aje/kwu461. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grimm KA, Foltz JL, Blanck HM, Scanlon KS. Household income disparities in fruit and vegetable consumption by state and territory: results of the 2009 behavioral risk factor surveillance system. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112(12):2014–21. 10.1016/j.jand.2012.08.030. - PubMed
    1. Rasmussen M, Krolner R, Klepp K-I, Lytle L, Brug J, Bere E, et al. Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among children and adolescents: a review of the literature. Part I: Quantitative studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2006;3(1):1–9. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data