Introduction: In our prior research on the 11-county service area of the Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank (“GPCFB”), we identified service gaps in 72 census tracts of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. However, this analysis only considered distance between the population weighted census tract centroids and GPCFB or partner services. Our current analysis extends these findings to consider measures of walkability and public transportation access.

Approach: Need was assessed using the CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), normalized to the 11-county service area; census tracts with an SVI above the median were classified as “higher need”. Access was assessed using measures of pedestrian and public transportation access found in the literature. EPA’s National Walkability Index was aggregated to the census tract level for pedestrian considerations.

Results: There are 402 census tracts in Allegheny County, of which 158 (39.3%) are higher need; 101 (63.9%) of these higher need census tracts have pedestrian access to a GPCFB or partner site. Most of these census tracts (n=90; 89.1%) have a National Walkability Index in either the above average or most walkable categories. Of the remaining higher need census tracts, 43 (75.4%) have public transportation access to a GPCFB or partner site. This leaves 14 (8.9%) of the higher need census tracts without pedestrian or public transportation access to existing GPCFB or partner services.

Discussion: This extended access study allows GPCFB to prioritize census tracts in Allegheny County for future programming based on multiple definitions of access.

Introduction: Produce prescription programs (PRxs) are promising “Food as Medicine” interventions that provide people with low incomes with incentives for purchasing fruits and vegetables. We sought to understand PRx clients’ perceptions of being treated with respect when participating in PRxs.

Methods: Through an equitable academic-community-clinical partnership, we conducted a mixed methods evaluation. We conducted a survey (n=216) and focus groups (n=4) with PRx clients from two Federally Qualified Health Centers in California. We used descriptive and thematic analysis to analyze the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. We organized qualitative findings according to the components of respect in the High-Quality Health System framework.

Results: 92% of clients felt respected when signing up, 87% felt respected with program communications, and 82% felt respected when using incentives (i.e., gift cards). Clients felt they were treated with dignity when healthcare providers and program staff showed genuine interest in their well-being. Clients reported that providers and program staff used clear communication but desired more clarity that only fresh produce could be purchased. Using gift cards gave clients privacy and ensured non-discrimination at checkout, as cashiers were unable to tell the cards were from a food assistance program. Clients liked that they had autonomy to select their produce, though they wanted more autonomy to choose where to shop.

Discussion: PRx evaluations should incorporate a focus on respect to inform quality improvement efforts. Such efforts are critical for upholding the right of clients to be treated with respect and for maximizing program engagement, satisfaction, and health outcomes.

Introduction: Food insecurity affects the healthfulness of children’s and adults diets. Jointly improving food access and cooking skills could improve healthfulness of family diets. The objective of this research was to assess the feasibility and impact of a plant-forward Family Cooking Night intervention, with foods supplied, on healthy eating and cooking constructs.

Methods: The three recruitment sites were schools in a large city that are eligible for SNAP-Ed. The Family Cooking Night series involved six sessions, where all foods were provided. Participants were taught cooking skills including knife skills, building soups and salads, sautéing, braising, and using seasoning. They complete pre- and post-surveys online assessing: cooking self-efficacy and attitudes as well as towards healthy eating, and self-reported food preparation literacy. The primary outcomes of interest were assessed utilizing paired t-tests.

Results: Twenty-three caregivers were recruited, with 19 participants attending all sessions and 12 participants completed both the pre- and post-test. There was an increase in cooking self-efficacy from pre- to post-test (p= 0.02). No changes in healthy eating self-efficacy and cooking attitude were observed, but pre-test results showed high confidence in healthy eating and disagreement with negative cooking attitudes. Self-perceived food preparation literacy showed small changes (increase in preparing vegetables, assessing produce quality) (p<0.10).

Conclusions: An online cooking intervention that includes food provisions for the recipes can engage SNAP-Ed participants, improving cooking self-efficacy. The sustainability of this intervention, which provides groceries at no cost to families and delivers groceries to a convenient location, will require private-public partnership development.

Introduction: Trauma Informed Nutrition Security (TINS) is a specialized approach to trauma-informed care that was incorporated into a statewide nutrition education program to address the intersection between trauma and nutrition disparities among SNAP-eligible individuals. There are six TINS principles centering on client experience: safety, transparency, peer support, collaboration, empowerment, and cultural issues. This study identifies and compares educators’ reflections on incorporating TINS principles with participant experiences during workshops.

Approach: Feedback surveys with open-ended and single-response questions were administered to assess educators’ perspectives on implementing the TINS curriculum during the pilot year. Participant surveys were updated to gather their feedback and experience of each TINS principle. Results were analyzed using a mixed-methods approach.

Results: Qualitative content analyses of educator responses identified ‘safety’ and ‘transparency’ as TINS principles incorporated with confidence. Similarly, 69% of participants reported feeling safe and comfortable during workshops. Educators reported ‘collaboration and mutuality’ was challenging to incorporate into workshops. In contrast, participants reported experiencing ‘collaboration and mutuality’ very often (62% of the time). Overall, 52% of participants indicated experiencing at least one TINS principle during workshops.

Discussion: When addressing the intersection of complex concerns like trauma and food insecurity, multiple perspectives are critical for program improvements. The results of this feedback survey suggest it is feasible to incorporate TINS into nutrition education workshops, thus translating key TINS principles into practice. Ongoing evaluation of educators’ and participants’ experience during the pilot year will inform program improvements and supports for continuing the integration of TINS practices into statewide nutrition education.