VOICES FOR FOOD: UTILIZING FOOD POLICY COUNCILS TO BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN FOOD SECURITY AND HEALTHY FOOD CHOICES

• Sponsoring Institution: National Institute of Food and Agriculture
• Project Status: COMPLETE
• Funding Source: AFRI COMPETITIVE GRANT
• Reporting Frequency: Annual
• Accession No.: 0230407
• Grant No.: 2013-69004-20401
• Cumulative Award Amt.: $3,964,616.00
• Proposal No.: 2012-01823
• Project Start Date: Jan 1, 2013
• Project End Date: Dec 31, 2019
• Grant Year: 2017
• Program Code: [A5141]- Global Food Security: Improved Sustainable Food Systems to Reduce Hunger and Food Insecurity Domestically and Globally

Recipient Organization
SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY
PO BOX 2275A
BROOKINGS,SD 57007

Performing Department
Cooperative Extension Service

Non Technical Summary
A collaborative, multi-state (Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and South Dakota), multi-disciplinary team of nutrition, agriculture, youth, community development, and evaluation specialists from the North Central Region has come together to address food security in rural food deserts. The Project Team proposes an innovative, integrated research and extension project that will: (1) implement a community-based model to enhance food security; (2) use a community based participatory research design in six states to examine outcomes; and (3) utilize on-line distance learning (including eXtension) to document and disseminate best practices. This project proposes to use a community-based approach to target policy changes implemented by local Food Policy Councils (FPCs). FPCs can increase the availability of, and access to nutritious food, thus improving food security in rural food deserts. FPCs determine and drive what food is available in food pantries and how that food is offered to the clients (pre-selected boxes or bags, or client choice). This project is unique in that some of the communities that will be involved already have well-established FPCs, while others do not. Our intent is to gain broad knowledge about the impact of FPCs on food security, as some states will be assisting communities in developing new FPCs, and other states will be providing additional support to strengthen existing FPCs. In order to be sustainable, Extension must augment the traditional approach of "experts" working with individuals and look at the broader strategy of assisting communities in changing policies that may affect food security. For this project, Extension professionals will use community coaching and social marketing techniques in a community development approach to enhance food security. This project is unique in that some of the communities may already have well-established FPCs, while others may not. A Voices for Food kit will be developed and utilized with each community and will include tools for: 1) developing local FPCs; 2) implementing guided client choice food pantries; and (3) integrating, targeted nutrition education resources for use at food pantries. Project Coordinators will be hired in each state and trained in community coaching, social marketing, and evaluation techniques. Only the intervention communities will be coached by the extension Project Coordinators to develop new, or support existing FPCs to change policies to increase the availability of nutritious foods, and move food pantries toward guided client choice, thus enhancing food security.

Animal Health Component

80%

Research Effort Categories

Basic

(N/A)

Applied

80%

Developmental

20%

Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)	Subject of Investigation (SOI)	Field of Science (FOS)	Percent
704	6099	3020	30%
703	6099	3020	40%
724	6099	3020	30%

Knowledge Area
703 - Nutrition Education and Behavior; 724 - Healthy Lifestyle; 704 - Nutrition and Hunger in the Population;

Subject Of Investigation
6099 - People and communities, general/other;

Field Of Science
3020 - Education;

Keywords

food policy councils

food security

nutrition education

food pantries

community based participatory research

Goals / Objectives
The goal of this project is to enhance food security in selected diverse rural food desert communities. Extension Objectives: 1. Twelve communities will: develop a new or support an existing FPC; provide support to the local FPC to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; provide support to the local FPC to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. 2. A Voices for Food kit of evidence-based best practices for developing FPCs, implementing a guided client choice system, and offering integrated nutrition education appropriate for clients of pantries will be assembled and provided to the 24 communities. 3. Disseminate results via technology, and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. Research Objectives: 1. Identify and/or develop assessment tools to measure changes in food security that will be pilot-tested in selected communities. 2. Test the following hypothesis: that having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs; that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs; and that greater improvement in food security will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. 3. Assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit to the community in developing or improving FPCs. Expected Outcomes: Extension: 1. Develop assessment tools to measure food security and a Voices for Food kit to assist communities; 2. Develop new or improve existing FPCs; 3. The FPCs in the intervention communities will increase the availability of healthy foods at the local food pantries; 4. The food pantries in the intervention communities will move towards a guided client choice system, with integrated nutrition education; and 5. Disseminate results via eXtension and other technology, and through published research manuscripts and presentations. Research: 1. Test the following hypothesis: that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs; that having Extension professionals engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs; and that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with food pantries that use a guided client choice system, including integrated, targeted nutrition education; and 2. Assess the perceived value that the community has on the effectiveness of the Voices for Food kit in assisting the community in developing a new or improving an existing FPC.

Project Methods
This project proposes to select two control, and matching two intervention communities in each state, for a total of 24 diverse rural food desert communities. The control communities will not have an existing Food Policy Council (FPC). The intervention communities may or may not have an existing FPC. During the first year, a Voices for Food kit will be developed and pre-tested. Each of the control and intervention communities will receive a Voices for Food kit of information and resources on developing FPCs and the guided client choice pantries. The control communities will not be provided with additional training or support to assist them in their efforts to improve food security until the delayed intervention in year five. Each state will hire a half-time Project Coordinator who will work with the intervention communities in years two through five, and the delayed intervention control communities in year five. This Coordinator, along with the Project Team, will be trained in community coaching and social marketing techniques. Training in social marketing skills will also be provided to the FPC members in the intervention communities. Coaching techniques will assist the intervention communities in developing a new or improving an existing FPC. The FPC will work towards policy changes and implementing a guided client choice model in which the clients can choose their food items based on a point system, and which also includes an integrated nutrition education component. The intervention communities will develop a sustainability plan to assure continuation of the project. Funding to support intervention and control communities to perform grant activities will be administered. Additional steps will be taken when working with the selected communities to ensure that there is active participation from low-income community members (food pantry clients) on the food policy councils. Pre- and post-assessment tools will be developed or adapted from existing tools and pre-tested. Training will be provided to those who will be administering the assessments in each state to assure quality and consistency. Pre-assessments will be conducted in control and intervention communities. Although the assessments will be determined in year one, some examples of assessments that could be utilized include: the U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module to determine food security status; an assessment tool will need to examine what food is available in food pantries, and what choices clients are making; assessments for the staff and volunteers at the food pantries to examine their nutrition knowledge as it relates to their ability to assist clients in making more healthy choices; and assessments that measure enhanced cultural competence awareness and skills among FPCs, food pantry volunteers and staff. Process and quantitative evaluations will be conducted throughout the implementation years, and will assist in making any needed mid-course changes. Mid-term assessments will also be completed to assure that the intervention communities are making progress. Post-assessments will be completed in each of the control and intervention communities.

Progress 01/01/13 to 12/31/19

Outputs
Target Audience:Four target audiences were reached through the efforts of "Voices for Food" during this reporting period: 1) economically disadvantaged groups that utilize food pantries, 2) community stakeholders/food systems partners engaged in food council work which reaches the community at large - including children, 3) groups of all races and ethnicities and families; and 4) Extension professionals who worked to implement the intervention. Economically disadvantaged groups that utilize food pantries were targeted through efforts to further implement the "Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit," which included nutrition education, cultural competency training, and food safety training. Further, food pantries were paired with developing Food Policy Councils (FPCs) that supported them in their efforts. Community stakeholders and food systems partners were targeted through the use of the community coach (Extension Professional/Nutrition Educator) as they worked to develop FPCs using the "Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide." Community stakeholders and food systems partners also engaged in the trainings offered in the "Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit" (nutrition education, cultural competency training, and food safety training). The community at large was reached through the efforts of "Voices for Food," as they benefit from the educational opportunities that council members, staff/volunteers, and clients engage in. Extension professionals, health professionals, and community champions were targeted through a nation-wide training held at Michigan State University, and for state-wide training efforts in Michigan and Missouri. Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Members of the "Voices for Food" team attended over 25 conferences for professional development and to present on "Voices for Food" work. The conferences were valuable to the project team and allowed for attendees to bring the knowledge they attained during conferences back to the project team for application to the "Voices for Food" project. In 2019, presentations were made at the Pennsylvania Nutrition Education Network Conference, the National Health Outreach Conference, SOS No Kid Hungry Conference, the Association of SNAP Nutrition Education Administrators, and the American Society for Nutrition Conference. Over the course of the grant, several graduate assistants and numerous student volunteers participated in training activities to enhance their skillset in collecting data, and working with data. Members of the "Voices for Food" team served as one on one mentors to them during their time with the project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results were disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, oral presentations, poster presentations, and national conference pre-conference sessions as noted previously. Internally in each of the six participating states, the toolkits have been shared and are planned for use in many of their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education (SNAP-Ed) plans of work for fiscal years beyond 2019. The Voices for Food team provided national trainings in 2019 to groups of Cooperative Extension Educators beyond the walls of the current six states participating in this project to extend the knowledge and work to economically disadvantaged communities and audiences across the United States. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Extension Objective #1: Develop new or strengthen exisiting food councils Over the course of the "Voices for Food" (VFF) project period, 12 intervention communities (2 per state) engaged with a community coach to develop or strengthen Food Policy Councils (FPCs), forge partnerships with local food pantries to transition to a guided client-choice method of distribution (MyChoice), and develop plans of work for each year that included strategies to increase availability of healthy foods to low-income residents of the community. Food pantry staff, volunteers, and food pantry clients participated in the VFF Ambassador's Trainings. All 12 comparison communities received VFF materials, but did not engage with a community coach. After the intervention was complete, the 12 comparison communities engaged with a community coach for over a year, and were able to make sustainable progress on FPC work. Each community employed a different approach to develop FPCs and increase the availability of healthy foods to low-income residents at food pantries. Progress in all communities was bolstered through the award of VFF mini-grant funds; a total of $187,106 was awarded in six states over six years. The intervention communities accounted for $111,217 in mini-grant funds, while the comparison communities' were approved for $75,889. All communities had access to the same amount of funding. Extension Objective #2: Assemble and disseminate evidence-based Voices for Food materials. The Project Team assembled the VFF materials prior to the intervention. All materials were provided to the 12 intervention and 12 comparison communities. Included in the VFF materials are numerous resources, but of particular note are: the Executive Summary, Food Council Creation Guide, Food Council Scorecard, Food Pantry Toolkit, MyChoice Pantry Scorecard, and the Voices for Food Ambassador's Training. Extension Objective #3: Disseminate results via technology, face-to-face local, state and national conferences. In June 2019, the project team hosted a 2-day, VFF Training in East Lansing, MI. There were 65 attendees from 19 states. The training included information on VFF, VFF materials, Scorecards, a hands on food pantry experience, community coaching, facilitative leadership, and the VFF Ambassadors Training. The goal was to equip attendees with the basic skills needed to implement VFF. Following the in-person training, the project team returned to their individual states to train more local staff as community coaches to carry out VFF work in new communities within the six state group. The Project Team applied for and was accepted into the SNAP Ed Toolkit in 2019. The inclusion of VFF in the SNAP Ed Toolkit ensures that the VFF work can continue through the PSE portion of the SNAP Ed Toolkit. Conference Presentations were made at 25 conferences across the United States regarding VFF methods, results, and implementation. Research Objective #1: Identify and/or develop assessment tools. All assessment tools were developed and pilot-tested for reliability before use. The assessment tools were used to collect pre-, mid- and post- intervention data from the 12 intervention and 12 comparison communities. The assessment tools allowed for evaluation of numerous aspects of the project and the overall efficacy of the intervention. Research Objective #2: Test the hypothesis that having Extension Educators engaged with communities though community coaching will lead to establishment of food councils. This objective was assessed using the Food Council Scorecard and the MyChoice Pantry Scorecard. The results of the Food Council Scorecard showed significant differences between intervention and comparison pantries from pre-intervention to post-intervention. Given these results, we can conclude that as a result of the implementation of the VFF intervention, Food Council Scorecard scores in intervention communities increased significantly (10.3 ± 1.7 vs 0.74 ± 1.7, p=.001), and were significantly higher than comparison communities (2.1 ± 2.8 vs 0, p=.02), indicating a greater degree of implementation of the key elements outlined in the Food Council Creation Guide. The results of the MyChoice Pantry Scorecard showed significant differences between intervention and comparison pantries from pre-intervention to post-intervention. Given these results, we can conclude that as a result of the implementation of the VFF intervention, MyChoice scores in food pantries significantly improved in the intervention (21.8 ± 1.0 vs 11.8 ± 1.6, p=0.00), when compared to comparison groups (8.5 ± 1.5 vs 9.1 + 1.6, p=.788), indicating pantries were providing clients with more choice and nutritious foods. Since community coaching was the difference between intervention and comparison communities, it is plausible that community coaching is the reason for the improvements. Research Objective #3: Test the hypothesis that greater improvement in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards MyChoice. Adult food security improved significantly in both the intervention and comparison groups. There were several improvements in the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) Score in both groups, including an increased in HEI Total Score, increased whole grains, increased total proteins, increased seafood and plant proteins, increased fatty acids, and decreased saturated fats. These results indicate that both groups experienced a positive change in food security and the pantry clients experienced improved diets. We anticipated that food security and HEI scores would improve more in the intervention group in contrast to comparison groups, however, we noted improvements in both groups. An explanation is that both groups received an intervention of coaching and VFF materials or just VFF materials. These results are meaningful because intervention groups changed at a faster rate when compared to the comparison group. Based on these results, we can say that community coaching, when combined with the VFF materials is effective, especially if communities are looking to make changes quickly. However, if communities have more time and can be patient, they could just use the VFF materials. Research Objective #4: Assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food materials to the community. Key Informant Interviews and the responses regarding the VFF materials in the Food Pantry Director Surveys and the Community Stakeholders surveys were completed and analyzed. A revised version of the VFF materials was created based on evidence from the surveys and interviews. Several new areas of content were included in the final version, including but not limited to, Community Coaching, The Organizational Readiness to Implement Change (ORIC) Tool, Food Council Scorecard, MyChoice Pantry Scorecard, Food Council Scorecard Coaching Questions, and MyChoice Pantry Scorecard Coaching Questions. Once revisions were finalized, the VFF materials were critically reviewed by an editor, and graphically designed. The evidence-based VFF materials have been re-released to the 12 intervention and 12 comparison communities. Research Objective #5: Lessons learned for sustainability and future replication of the model in other communities. "Best practices" for implementation were incorprated into all trainings and presentations that were completed this year. There was a special focus on sharing lessons learned from engaging nutrition educators in policy, systems, and environment (PSE), which is relatively novel. For future replication of the model in other communities, the final VFF materials available for use by universities and communities. The tools are housed on the South Dakota State University Extension website, https://extension.sdstate.edu/voices-food, and are available at no charge.

Publications

• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Stluka, S., Moore, L., Eicher-Miller, HA., Franzen-Castle, L., Henne, B., Mehrle, D., Remley, D., McCormack, L. 2018. Voices for food: Methodologies for implementing a multi-state community-based intervention in rural, high poverty community. BMC Public Health. 18:1055. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5957-9.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright, BN., Bailey, RL., Craig, BA., Mettes, RD., McCormack, L., Stluka, S., Franzen-Castle, L., Henne, B., Mehrle, D., Remley, D., EIcher-Miller, HA. 2018. Daily dietary intake patterns improve after visiting a food pantry among food-insecure rural Midwestern adults. Nutrients, 10, 583. doi:10.3390/nu10050583.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Franzen-Castle, L., Shafrath, T., Moore, L., Schwader, A., Remley, DT., Stluka, S. 2018. Using Photovoice to identify rural community food issues. The Journal of the National Extension Association of Family and Consumer Sciences.13:11-26.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Gibson, K., Henne, B., McCormack, L., Remley, D., Stluka, S. 2018. Voices for food: Engaging extension professionals as community coaches (CCs) to fulfill policy, system, and environmental (PSE) standards. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Meeting. Minneapolis, MN. July 21.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Accepted Year Published: 2018 Citation: Remley, D., Franzen-Castle, L., McCormack, L., Eicher-Miller, HA. 2018. Chronic health condition influences on client perceptions of food pantries in low-income, rural communities. American Journal of Health Behavior. (in press).
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire, MM., McCormack, LA. 2018. Food pantry layout and pantry client perceptions. South Dakota Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Annual Meeting. Sioux Falls, SD. Sept. 20.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire, MM., McCormack, LA. 2018. Voices for food. South Dakota Public Health Association Conference. Sioux Falls, SD. June 19.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Stluka S. 2018. Voices for food. Well connected communities panel. North Central Region Showcase. San Antonio, TX. Sept. 26.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2018 Citation: Liu, Y., Ma, M., Leidy, HJ., Stluka, S., Remley, D., McCormack, LA., Franzen-Castle, L., Henne, R., Mehrle, D., Zhang, Y., Eicher-Miller, HA. 2018. Energy distribution and breakfast skipping associate with diet quality among U.S. Midwestern food pantry clients. American Society of Nutrition Conference. Boston, MA. June 11.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Under Review Year Published: 2018 Citation: Liu, Y., Remley, DT., Zhang, Y., Eicher-Miller, HA. 2018. Frequency of food pantry use and food security status associate with diet quality among Indiana food pantry clients. J Acad Nutr Diet. (Under review).
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright, BN., McCormack, LA., Stluka, S., Contreras, D., Franzen-Castle, L., Henne, B., Mehrle, D., Remley, D., Eicher-Miller, HA. 2018. Findings from a social ecological modeled coaching intervention to improve food security and dietary quality among a multi-state sample of adult rural, Midwestern emergency food pantry clients. Health and Human Sciences Extension Update Meeting. West Lafayette, IN. April 4.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright, BN. 2018. Effects of a social ecological modeled coaching intervention on food security and diet quality among a multistate sample of rural, Midwestern adult emergency food pantry clients. Interdepartmental Nutrition Program Seminar. West Lafayette, IN. May 4.
• Type: Theses/Dissertations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire, M. 2018. Level of satisfaction among food pantry clients, staff/volunteers, and directors and its association with client choice in food pantry layouts. SDSU. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2697. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/2697.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Under Review Year Published: 2019 Citation: McCormack, L., Moore, L., Eicher-Miller, H., Remley, D., Stluka, S. 2018. Voices for food: A tool for implementing guided-client choice in rural food pantries. Translational Behavioral Medicine. (Under Review).
• Type: Theses/Dissertations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire, M., McCormack, LA., Letcher, A., Stluka, S. 2019. Level of satisfaction among food pantry clients, staff/volunteers, and directors and its association with client choice in food pantry layouts. South Dakota State University. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. 2697.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2019 Citation: Eicher-Miller, H., Wright, B., Guenther, P., McCormack, L., Stluka, S., Remley, D., Vasquez-Mejia, C. 2019. Nutritional quality of vegetables, fruits, protein foods, and sodium distributed in client food bags is positively associated with client diet quality in rural food pantries (P04-138-19). Current Developments in Nutrition, 3(Supplement1).
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2019 Citation: Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Remley, D., Eicher-Miller, H. 2019. Frequency of food pantry use is associated with diet quality among Indiana food pantry clients. J Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 119(10), 1703-1712.

Progress 01/01/18 to 12/31/18

Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period, Voices for Food team members focused their efforts on implementing the delayed intervention in comparison communities (2 comparisons per state for a total of 12 communities). There were four target audiences that were reached through the efforts of Voices for Food: 1) economically disadvantaged groups that utilize food pantries, 2) community stakeholders/food systems partners engaged in food council work which reaches the community at large - including children, 3) groups of all races and ethnicities and families; and 4) Extension professionals who worked to implement the intervention. Economically disadvantaged groups that utilize food pantries were targeted through efforts to implement the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit, which included nutrition education, cultural competency training, and food safety training. Further, food pantries were paired with developing Food Policy Councils (FPCs) that supported them in the development of annual budget plans and training programs. Community stakeholders and food systems partners were targeted through the use of the community coach (Extension Professional/Nutrition Educator) as they worked to develop FPCs using the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide. Community stakeholders and food systems partners also engaged in the trainings offered in the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit (nutrition education, cultural competency training, and food safety training). The community at large was reached through the efforts of Voices for Food, as they benefit from the educational opportunities that council members, staff/volunteers, and clients engage in. Further, while each community is unique, many FPCs began offering other educational opportunities at community gardens, in local schools, and at health fairs. Changes/Problems:The project team has applied for and been approved for a 1 year no cost extension for 2019 (Year 7). We have learned much throughout the tenure of this grant, but the community work takes time. Building relationships and trust with community partners takes time. Additionally, due to the multi-state nature of this project and sheer amount of data we have collected, it has taken longer to collate and clean all of the datasets than we anticipated. Lastly, the project team spent a substantial amount of time conducting over 20 Key Informant Interviews to support changes made in the project materials and inform the results of the intervention. The Key Informant Interviews were a necessary piece of the evaluation plan as they provide a different quality and depth of information to analyze. So, while the interviews and evaluation of qualitative data took longer than anticipated, it was a critical component of our work that needed careful consideration of the process and results. The no-cost extension year will be used to focus our efforts on analyzing data, formulating results, and dissemination of "Best Practices", which includes the development and release of training on Voices for Food to enhance long-term sustainability. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Professional Development: Becky Henne (staff), Kendra Gibson (staff), Norma Lundeen (staff), Daniel Remley (staff), Karima Samadi (staff), Lacey McCormack (staff), Donna Mehrle (staff) and Jennifer Nevatt (staff) attended the 2018 Society for Nutrition, Education and Behavior in Minneapolis, MN from July 21-24, 2018. Professional Development: Heather Eicher-Miller (staff), Yibin Liu (Post Doc) and Breanne Wright (PhD student) attended the American Society for Nutrition Conference in Boston, MA from June 9-12, 2018. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results were disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, oral presentations, poster presentations, and national conference pre-conference sessions as noted previously. Internally in each of the six participating states, the toolkits have been shared and are planned for use in many of their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education (SNAP-Ed) plans of work for fiscal years 2019 and beyond. The Voices for Food team has been invited to provide national trainings in 2019 to groups of Cooperative Extension Educators beyond the walls of the current six states participating in this project to extend the knowledge and work to economically disadvantaged communities and audiences across the United States. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Extension Objective #1: Twelve (12) communities (two communities per state) will: 1) Develop a new or strengthen an existing Food Policy Council to include stakeholders from multiple sectors of the community; 2) Provide support to the local Food Policy Council to increase the availability of healthy foods at local food pantries; 3) Help the FPC work on other activities and strategies to increase the availability of healthy foods to low-income residents of the community; 4) Provide support to the local Food Policy Council to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; 5) Provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, 6) Provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. Extension Objective #2: The Project Team will assemble a Voices for Food kit of evidence-based best practices for developing Food Policy Councils, implementing a guided client choice system, and offering integrated nutrition education appropriate for clients of pantries. The Voices for Food kit will be provided to the 12 intervention and the 12 matching comparison communities. The project team is currently working to integrate the evidence that was found via Key Informant Interviews and other survey tools into the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit (Voices for Food Kit). Revisions are anticipated to be completed by the beginning of Year 7, and then graphic design adjustments will be made to the materials. Upon finalization, the Voices for Food Kit will be re-released to the 12 intervention and 12 comparison communities to ensure they have the most up to date and evidence-based materials. Furthermore, the materials will be widely released to the public. Extension Objective #3: The Project Team will disseminate results (best practices) via technology (e.g. eXtension, web pages, and other social media outlets), and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. An ample amount of data has been collected and the Project Team will continue to complete all primary analyses related to each research question/objective in order to provide a complete picture of the work that was completed and the impact it had on rural, high poverty communities. eXtension is no longer a viable option for dissemination, so, results (best practices) will be disseminated via trainings, web pages, social media, and local, state and national conferences. Training others to use Voices for Food across the nation will be a primary focus. A webinar series highlighting the model of Voices for Food that can be replicated in all areas, regardless of whether or not they are rural, urban or high poverty is in the planning stages. In particular, we will highlight employing Extension Professionals, SNAP Educators, and other health professionals as community coaches to complete this valuable work and promote sustainability in communities across the country. In 2019, the Voices for Food team plans to disseminate the results of this project at as many face-to-face conferences as possible. A presentation is planned at the Pennsylvania Nutrition Education Network Conference on the results and application of Voices for Food. Proposal abstracts have been submitted for Association of SNAP Nutrition Education Administrators, the National Health Outreach Conference, and the Society of Nutrition, Education and Behavior. Research Objective #1: The Project Team will identify and/or develop assessment tools to measure changes in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods. All work has been completed for this objective. Research Objective #2: The Project Team will test the hypothesis that having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to the establishment or strengthening of multi-stakeholder Food Policy Councils working on goals to improve healthy food access for food pantry clients. The Project team will continue to analyze the effectiveness of the intervention (community coaching + Voices for Food Kit) as a whole to address this hypothesis. There was an ample amount of data collected during the last 6 years and it all culminates to answer this question. This hypothesis will be assessed using the Food Council Implementation Tracking Form, Community Stakeholders Survey, Training Tracking Form, Voices for Food Coaching Journal, Voices for Food Annual Budget Plan and Justification and Budget Follow-up Form. Research Objective #3: The Project Team will test the hypothesis that greater improvement in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods will occur in those communities that have stronger Food Policy Councils that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. Analyzing the various components of this hypothesis will carry over into Year 7 as we analyze the intervention as a whole, interpret those results, and prepare results for dissemination. As noted in the Accomplishments section, the work on these datasets is lengthy but the project team has made much progress on them. Both the pre- and mid- time points have been cleaned, prepared, and are ready for comparison with the post-intervention time point. The post-intervention time point datasets will have density assigned to each item and the Healthy Eating index applied to them to assess the healthfulness of the foods. This hypothesis will be assessed using the Food Pantry Inventory Log, Participant Food Box Content Log, ASA24® [27] and Food Pantry MyChoice Observation Tool, MyChoice Scorecard and Food Council Scorecard. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe the study population at baseline. Analyses include examining changes in pantry food access/availability, pantry client food security, and dietary intake as a result of intervention or comparison group assignment. These outcomes will also be compared longitudinally. T-tests and chi-square will be used for initial examination of mean and proportion differences in characteristics and outcome variables among treatment groups, followed by mixed-model regression analyses which will allow adjustment for covariates and the examination of independent variables on outcomes. Research Objective #4: The Project Team will assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food Kit to the community in developing or improving food policy councils. The Key Informant Interviews have been transcribed, analyzed and formatted into recommendations for the revision (noted in Accomplishment section) of the Voices for Food Kit. There are additional datasets that will be considered when assessing the perceived value of the Voices for Food Kit. The Project Team will complete all revisions to the materials based upon the evidence collected throughout the intervention. Research Objective #5: Lessons learned for sustainability and future replication of the model in other communities. Upon completion of the intervention time period and post-data collection, the project team will collate the internal lessons learned with the results of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation components. Lessons learned will be formatted into "best practices" for dissemination. The lessons learned will be included in multiple scientific manuscripts, conference presentations, and meetings at the local, state and national level. For future replication of the model in other communities, the final Voices for Food Kit will be made available for use by universities and communities. The tools will be housed on the South Dakota State University Extension website, www.extension.sdstate.edu.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Extension Objective #1: Twelve communities will: develop a new or support an existing FPC; provide support to the local FPC to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; provide support to the local FPC to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. (100% Accomplished) Finalizing work within 12 intervention communities (2 per state) was a primary effort under Objective 1. The project team also delivered the Voices for Food intervention (community coaching) to the 12 comparison communities during which these communities were able to make sustainable progress on food council work. Each comparison community was unique and employed a different approach to develop FPCs and increase the availability of healthy foods to low-income residents at food pantries by supporting the implementation of the guided client choice system, MyChoice. Progress was bolstered through award of Voices for Food mini-grant funds; a total of $187,106 was approved across six states over the past six years. The intervention communities' accounted for $111,217 in approved mini-grant funds, while the comparison communities' were approved for $75,889. All communities had access to the same amount of funding. All work under this objective was completed in 2018. Extension Objective #2: The Project Team will assemble a Voices for Food kit of evidence-based best practices for developing FPCs, implementing a guided client choice system, and offering integrated nutrition education appropriate for clients of pantries. The Voices for Food kit will be provided to 12 intervention and 12 matching comparison communities. (70% Accomplished) Over 20 Key Informant Interviews and corresponding surveys were conducted to assess the components of the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit (Voices for Food Kit). The qualitative data from the interviews complemented the quantitative data found in other survey tools. The Key Informant Interviews were transcribed and partially analyzed in 2018, with analysis to be finalized by February 2019. The analysis will then be formatted into recommendations for the revision of the Voices for Food Kit in 2019. Extension Objective #3: The Project Team will disseminate results (best practices) via technology (e.g. eXtension, web pages, and other social media outlets), and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. (70% Accomplished) All pre-intervention, mid-intervention and post-intervention data has been collected, cleaned, collated and is ready to be analyzed. A plan for dissemination has been developed and includes facilitating a Voices for Food training for all Project Team states in spring 2019. The Voices for Food training will utilize a train the trainer model and will focus on community coaching, and all final Voices for Food Kit. Research Objective #1: The Project Team will identify and/or develop assessment tools to measure changes in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods. (100% Accomplished) Work for this objective was completed prior to Year 6. Objective #2: The Project Team will test the hypothesis that having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to the establishment or strengthening of multi-stakeholder FPCs working on goals to improve healthy food access for food pantry clients. (80% Accomplished) The Project Team identified a method of quantifying the strength of FPCs and the degree of MyChoice in food pantries. A Food Council Scorecard and a MyChoice Scorecard were developed to assess these components between communities. The scorecards were also adapted for practical use, and have been tested for inter-rater reliability and validity. Pre- and post-assessment data from these scorecards are currently being analyzed, and will be used for two journal publications in 2019. Preliminary analysis of pre- to post-intervention scorecards indicates significant differences between intervention and comparison pantries, suggesting a greater degree of implementation in intervention communities. Since community coaching was the difference between intervention and comparison communities, it is plausible that community coaching is the reason for this improvement. Research Objective #3: The Project Team will test the hypothesis that greater improvement in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. (80% Accomplished) Substantial progress was made on this objective. The pre- to post- datasets involved in this hypothesis had to undergo a lengthy process to prepare for analysis including: cleaning and organizing of the data; correcting any issues; assigning USDA food codes from the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies 5.0; determining density of foods and then applying the Healthy Eating Index Scores to the food pantry inventory, the foods the clients were given at the pantry, and the foods they consumed. Data is currently being assessed and prepared for journal publications. Research Objective #4: The Project Team will assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit to the community in developing or improving food policy councils. (80% Accomplished) Pre- and mid- datasets are finalized. The Project Team conducted Key Informant Interviews with Project Coordinators, Food Champions, and Food Pantry Directors to address this objective. The interviews covered topics that supplement other surveys: (community readiness and perceived value of community coaching, facilitators, and barriers) and will aid the project team in assessing the perceived value and finalizing of all components of the Voices for Food Kit. The interviews have been transcribed, analyzed and formatted into recommendations for the revision of the Voices for Food Kit including: 1) Inclusion of results of Voices for Food in lay terms, along with quotes and testimonials from participating communities, 2) Inclusion of verbiage on the value of community coaching and recommendations for using Extension professionals/Nutrition Educators as community coaches paired with Voices for Food materials, 3) Revision and/or development of materials to accompany Voices for Food materials (i.e. Power points on implemention, Ambasadors' Training and examples of Hybrid Choice), 4) Inclusion of guidance for using social media, and 5) Development of a "trouble-shooting" section that addresses challenge areas. Research Objective #5: Lessons learned for sustainability and future replication of the model in other communities. (20% Accomplished) Lessons learned have been documented internally and focus both on implementing the project, and the process for working in a collaborative, multi-state, trans disciplinary group. Voices for Food could serve as a framework for other states, universities and organizations seeking to engage in trans disciplinary, multi-state grant funded projects. The project team will document and share lessons learned from engaging nutrition educators in policy, systems, and environment (PSE), which is relatively novel. Since Voices for Food focused on utilizing Extension Professionals/Nutrition Educators as community coaches, information will be shared for those seeking to do similar work. Lessons learned will be documented in presentations and manuscripts.

Publications

• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Stluka S, Moore L, Eicher-Miller HA, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, McCormack L. 2018. Voices for Food: Methodologies for implementing a multi-state community-based intervention in rural, high poverty community. BMC Public Health. 18:1055. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5957-9.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright BN, Bailey RL, Craig BA, Mettes RD, McCormack L, Stluka S, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, EIcher-Miller HA. 2018. Daily dietary intake patterns improve after visiting a food pantry among food-insecure rural Midwestern adults. Nutrients, 10, 583. doi:10.3390/nu10050583.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Franzen-Castle L, Shafrath T, Moore L, Schwader A, Remley DT, Stluka S. 2018. Using ⿿Photovoice⿝ to Identify Rural Community Food Issues. The Journal of the National Extension Association of Family and Consumer Sciences.13:11-26.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Under Review Year Published: 2018 Citation: Liu Y, Remley DT, Zhang Y, Eicher-Miller HA. 2018. Frequency of food pantry use and food security status associate with diet quality among Indiana food pantry clients. J Acad Nutr Diet. (Under review).
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright BN, McCormack LA, Stluka S, Contreras D, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, Eicher-Miller HA. 2018. Findings from a Social Ecological Modeled Coaching Intervention to Improve Food Security and Dietary Quality Among a Multi-State Sample of Adult Rural, Midwestern Emergency Food Pantry Clients. Health and Human Sciences Extension Update Meeting. April 4. West Lafayette, IN.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Wright BN. 2018. Effects of a social ecological modeled coaching intervention on food security and diet quality among a multistate sample of rural, Midwestern adult emergency food pantry clients. Interdepartmental Nutrition Program Seminar. May 4. West Lafayette, IN.
• Type: Theses/Dissertations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire M. 2018. Level of Satisfaction Among Food Pantry Clients, Staff/Volunteers, and Directors and its Association with Client Choice in Food Pantry Layouts. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2697. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/2697
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2018 Citation: Liu Y, Ma M, Leidy HJ, Stluka S, Remley D, McCormack LA, Franzen-Castle L, Henne R, Mehrle D, Zhang Y, Eicher-Miller HA. 2018. Energy distribution and breakfast skipping associate with diet quality among U.S. Midwestern food pantry clients. American Society of Nutrition Conference, June 11. Boston, MA.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire MM, McCormack LA. 2018. Food Pantry Layout and Pantry Client Perceptions. South Dakota Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Annual Meeting, Sept. 20. Sioux Falls, SD.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Dunmire MM, McCormack LA. 2018. Voices for Food. South Dakota Public Health Association Conference. June 19. Sioux Falls, SD.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Accepted Year Published: 2018 Citation: McCormack L, Moore L, Eicher-Miller H, Remley D, Stluka S. 2018. Voices for Food: A tool for implementing guided-client choice in rural food pantries. Translational Behavioral Medicine. (Under Review).
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Submitted Year Published: 2018 Citation: Stluka S, Moore L, Eicher-Miller H, Remley D, McCormack L. 2018. Voices for Food: A tool for developing and strengthening rural food policy councils. Translational Behavioral Medicine. (submitted).
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Stluka S. 2018. Voices for Food. Well Connected Communities Panel. North Central Region Showcase. Sept. 26. San Antonio, TX.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2018 Citation: Gibson K, Henne B, McCormack L, Remley D, Stluka S. 2018. Voices for Food: Engaging Extension Professionals as Community Coaches (CCs) to Fulfill Policy, System, and Environmental (PSE) Standards. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Meeting, July 21, Minneapolis, MN. Pre-conference session.
• Type: Journal Articles Status: Accepted Year Published: 2018 Citation: Remley D, Franzen-Castle L, McCormack, Eicher-Miller HA. 2018. Chronic Health Condition Influences on Client Perceptions of Food Pantries in Low-Income, Rural Communities. American Journal of Health Behavior. (in press).

Progress 01/01/17 to 12/31/17

Outputs
Target Audience: During this reporting period, Voices for Food team members wrapped uptheir work with selected intervention communities(2 interventions per state for a total of 12 intervention communities). With the intervention period ending, the Project Team also began initial workwith comparison communtiies to start thedelayed intervention(2 comparisons per state for a total of 12 comparison communities).There are many individuals and groups thatare reached by our efforts in the selected communities. One target audience in the selected communities are economicallydisadvantaged groups that utililze food pantries. Anothertarget audience are the community stakeholders and food systempartners engaged in food council work which reaches the community at large including, children, groups of all races andethnicities and families. Additionally, there is the target audience that consists of the Extension professionals that worked to implement the intervention during this reporting period. Changes/Problems:The Project Team has applied for and been approved for a 1 year no cost extension. As noted in previous reports, community based work takes a substantial amount of time to realize progression, and therefore our timeline was pushed back. Post-data collection was completed at the end of the reporting year. The Project Team feels that an additional year would allow time to complete all objectives that were included in the initial application and will work diligently to complete them. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?During this reporting period:Heather Eicher-Miller & Yibin Liu of Purdueattended both the Experimental Biology Conference in Chicagoand the Society for Nutrition, Education & Behavior conference in Washington, D.C.Donna Mehrle & Pam Duitsman of University of Missouri Extension attended the 2017 Urban Extension Conference in Bloomington, MN. Suzanne Stluka of South Dakota State University Extension and Lindsay Moore, of Moore Healthy Living, LLC attended the Capitol Hill Exhibition and Reception in Washington, D.C.. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?While the results of this study have not yet been disseminated, oral presentations, poster presentations, and exhibits were completed to share preliminary information regarding Voices for Food. An oral presentation and poster presentation was completed at the Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior and a poster presention at Experimental Biologyby Heather Eicher-Miller and Yibin Liu of Purdue University. The oral presentation and the poster presentation were authored by all PIs on the grant. Another poster presentation was completed at the Urban Extension Conference by Donna Mehrle and Pam Duitsman of University of Missouri Extension. Suzanne Stluka of South Dakota State Universityand Lindsay Moore of Moore Healthy Living, LLCpresented an exhibit at theCapitol Hill Exhibition and Reception in Washington, D.C.. Yibin Liu, Dan Remley and Heather Eicher-Miller submitted to the FASEB Journal. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Extension Objective1. Twelve communities will: develop a new or support an existing FPC; provide support to the local FPC to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; provide support to the local FPC to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. The Project Team will analyze all datasets to form results and assess the outcomes and impacts associated with them. Extension Objective 3.Disseminate results via technology, and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. Upon forming the results, outcomes and impacts, the project team will begin disemminating results via technology, through local state and national conferences and in the finalized matierals that will be released for use by Extension and health professionals and communities. The project team will formulate a plan for dissemination at the beginning of the final year by identifying key conferences and locations to release results and materials. Additionally, scientific manuscripts that address all core objectives and hypotheses will be authored in the final year. Research Objective2. Test the following hypothesis: that having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs; that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs; and that greater improvement in food security will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. The Project Team will analyze all datasets to form results and assess the outcomes and impacts associated with them. Research Objective 3. Assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit to the community in developing or improving FPCs. The Project Team will analyze all datasets to form results and assess the outcomes and impacts associated with them. Additionally, the project team plans to add a focus group component to the evaluation plan to assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit. The focus groups will also address other components such as readiness, experiences with coaching and the content of the Voices for Food kit. The project team plans to conduct focus groups with pantry directors and community champions, and community coaches.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? The broad impacts of Voices for Food have not yet been determined, as data from all timepoints (pre-interrvention, mid-intervention and post-intervention)is needed to do so. The Project Team focused on collecting post-intervention data during this reporting period, which will allow for impacts to be determined. While the broad impacts haven't been determined, the project team anticipatesthat when compared to communities that only receive Voices for Food materials, communities that also receive community coaching will: 1) form stronger food policy councils (FPCs), 2) increase availability of healthy food choices in local food pantries by transitioning from a traditional model of distribution to a guided-client choice model, 3)provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, 4) provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. Ultimately, it is anticipated that the changes made through the intervention will impact food security in a positive way. Extension Objective1. Twelve communities will: develop a new or support an existing FPC; provide support to the local FPC to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; provide support to the local FPC to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. (75% completed) 1) Major activities completed: Coaching activities were completed in intervention communities as Extension Personnel finished implementing the intervention in the 12 intervention communities. The focus of implementation during this reporting period was to finish implementing all components from the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit and long term sustainability. 2) Data collected: During this reporting period, ongoing data collection was completed using the Training Tracking Form,and the Community Observations Form. Additionally, the project team completed post-intervention data collection in each state. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: At this point, there is not a summary of results for the data collected in Year 5, as our evaluation focuses on drawing a comparison betweenpre-intervention, mid-point and post-intervention timepoints. Post data collection was completed at the end of Year 5. The Project team will begin analyzing all data during the final year. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized:The Project Team does not yet have statistical data to supportchanges in actions or knowledge, in the 12 intervention communities. Extension Objective2. A Voices for Food kit of evidence-based best practices for developing FPCs, implementing a guided client choice system, and offering integrated nutrition education appropriate for clients of pantries will be assembled and provided to the 24 communities. (100% completed) Completed in previous grantyears. Extension Objective 3.Disseminate results via technology, and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. (0% completed) Will be completed in final year. Research Objectives: Research Objective1. Identify and/or develop assessment tools to measure changes in food security that will be pilot-tested in selected communities. (100% completed) Completed in previous grantyears. Research Objective2. Test the following hypothesis: that having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs; that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs; and that greater improvement in food security will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. (75% completed) 1) Major activities completed: Project Personnel were engaged with intervention communities throughout the reporting period, coaching communtiies to develop, or continue strengthening FPCs, and transitioning food pantries towards a guided client choice system. During this reporting period, there were 80+ FPC meetings held amongst 12 communities with the goal of working on food security issues and supporting the food pantry in the transition from a traditional model of distribution to a guided client choice model of distribution. Food secutiry along withthe strength of the FPC and the level of choice offered within the pantry will be compared pre-, mid- and post- in Year 6. 2) Data collected: During this reporting period, ongoing data collected regarding FPCimplementation was collected andpost data collection was completed. Data regarding FPC implementation will provide valuable data to identify the strength of FPCs in all communities. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: At this time, all post-intervention data is being prepared to be analyzed and included in the comparison between pre- and mid- intervention timepoints. Since, the data has not yet been analyzed, there is not yet a summary of statistics and discussion of results to provide. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized. The Project Team doesn't yet have statistical data to supportchanges in actions or knowledge, in the 12 intervention communities, however we anticiipate changes in knowledge to occur as the result of the formation of FPCs, benefits of MyChoice (guided client choice) pantries and the benefits of engageing a diverse network of stakeholders. The project team anticipates changes in action to be a diverse network of food system stakeholders being engaged in FPC work and supporting the local food pantry. During this reporting period FPCs from various communities submitted an Annual Budget Plan and Justification and were approved for funding. Additionally, threeFPCs appliedfor and obtained 501c3 status which enhances the sustinability of those FPCs for the future as they will now be able to apply for their own grant funding and hold their own funds. The data supporting these outcomes and accomplishments will be ready to be analyzed in the final year. Research Objective 3. Assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit to the community in developing or improving FPCs. (0% completed) Will be completed in the final year.

Publications

• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Liu, Y., & Eicher-Miller H. A. (2017). Association between food insecurity and nutritional status of Indiana Food Pantry Users. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Conference, July 2017, Washington D.C. Oral abstract presentation. O39. minisymposium.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Liu, Y., Remley D. T., Zhang, Y., & Eicher-Miller H. A. (2017). Self-reported diabetes status moderates the association between food insecurity and body mass index. The FASEB Journal, 31(1 Supplement), 682-7.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Liu, Y., & Eicher-Miller H. A. (2017). Pantry visit frequency is associated with diet quality in Indiana Food Pantry Users, July 2017, Washington D.C. Poster no. P202.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Wright BN, McCormack L, Stluka S, Contreras D, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, Eicher-Miller HA. Pantry Use Predicts Food Security among Rural, Midwestern Emergency Food Pantry Users. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Conference, July 2017, Washington D.C. Abstract #O40. Oral presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Wright BN, McCormack L, Stluka S, Contreras D, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, Eicher-Miller HA. Food Group Intake Differs among Adult Food Secure, Low Food Secure and Very Low Food Secure Rural, Midwestern Emergency Food Pantry Users. Experimental Biology Conference, April 2017, Chicago IL. Poster presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2017 Citation: Duitsman, P. and Mehrle, D. Building Local Food Councils to Improve Community Food Security. 2017 Urban Extension Conference: Engaging in Collective Purpose. Bloomington, MN. May, 2017.

Progress 01/01/16 to 12/31/16

Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period, Voices for Food team members continued working extensively with the selected intervention communities (2 interventions per state for a total of 12 intervention communities). Additionally, all materials used for Voices for Food have been distributed to the remaining 12 comparison communities. There are many individuals and groups that are reached by our efforts in the selected communities. One target audience in the selected communities are economically disadvantaged groups that utililze food pantries. Another target audience are the community stakeholders and food system partners engaged in food council work which reaches the community at large including, children, groups of all races and ethnicities and families. Changes/Problems:The Project Team intends to apply for a 1 year, no cost extension for an anticipated Year 6. Community based work requires significant time to realize progression, which is why we hope to carry over that work over into a Year 6. Additionally, upon completion of post-intervention data collection, a substantial amount of time will be spent combining data sets, cleaning data sets, and analyzing data. The Project Team will use the analysis to drive revisions to the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide, and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit. In addition, the analysis will drive the assembly of "Best Practice" for dissemination. These activities will likely require time in an additional Year 6. Efforts for Year 5 & 6 will be guided by our previous experience with the amount of time it takes to complete community based work, to complete data collection, to combine and clean up data sets, and analyze that data. We are confident that if we carry over into a Year 6, we can complete all work under all objectives that we set out to complete at the beginning of this project. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?During this reporting year, all Voices for Food members attended the Society for Nutrition, Education and Behavior Conference in San Diego, CA for professional development. In addition, we met before the conference started to hold our annual Voices for Food face-to-face meeting where we paticipated in a Data Collection Training for mid-point data collection and recieved updates on intervention community progress. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Extension Objectives: Objective #1: The Project Coordinators will continue to provide support to the local Food Policy Council to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; help the FPC work on other activities and strategies to increase the availability of healthy foods to low-income residents of the community; provide support to the local Food Policy Council to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. The focus of these efforts in Year 5 will be on sustainability in the intervention communities. Therefore, in intervention communities, Project Coordinators will begin to pull back on coaching efforts in order to allow the councils and pantries to exercise greater independence moving forward. There will be a balance of coaching support and council independence in Year 5. Objective #2: The Project Team will pull both the Food Council Subcommittee and the Food Pantry Subcommittee back together to engage in planning sessions for how to proceed with revising the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit (best practices) based upon the results of project analysis. Objective #3: The Project Team will also reassemble the Dissemination & Sustainability Subcommittee to establish a plan for disseminating the results (best practices) via technology (e.g. eXtension, web pages, and other social media outlets), and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. Research Objectives: Objective #2: The Project Team will continue to will test the hypothesis that having Extension Educators (Project Coordinators) engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to the establishment or strengthening of multi-stakeholder Food Policy Councils working on goals to improve healthy food access for food pantry clients. Similarly to Extension Objective 1, the focus of coaching efforts will be on long-term sustainability in Year 5 in the intervention communities. After post-intervention data collection in August-September 2017, Project Coordinators will begin to engage in coaching activities in comparison communities as the delayed intervention begins. The delayed intervention activities will continue in a potential Year 6. Objective #3: The Project Team will continue to test the hypothesis that greater improvement in availability of healthy foods for pantry users, improvement in their food security and their intake of healthy foods will occur in those communities that have stronger Food Policy Councils that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. Once again, the efforts of the Project Team and council will be focused on long-term sustainability in the intervention communities. After post-intervention data collection in August-September 2017, coaching efforts for the council and pantry will focus on improving availability of healthy foods for pantry users. The delayed intervention activities will continue in a potential Year 6. Objective #4: The Project Team will begin to assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit to the community in developing or improving food policy councils. Upon completion of post-intervention data collection, the Data Analysis Subcommittee will begin analyzing collected data to help us understand the perceived value of coaching and the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit to the community. These results will also aid the Food Pantry Toolkit Subcommittee and the Food Council in their efforts to develop best practices. Outputs, activities and impacts achieved under this objective will likely not be completed in Year 5 and will need to continue in a potential Year 6. Objective #5: The Project Team will develop lessons learned for sustainability and future replication of the model in other communities. These activities will likely not be able to be accomplished in Year 5, as we will not be able to have the data fully analyzed by the end of the year, and will need to continue in a potential Year 6.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? While broad impacts are not yet collected, as those will be assessed after mid-point and post-intervention data collection, there are many expected impacts we anticipate achieving. We anticipate that all intervention communities will develop sustainable Food Councils, with coaching from Extension personnel that are comprised of a network of diverse food systems stakeholders. Food Councils will work hand-in-hand with participating food pantries to support their efforts to provide healthier food choices to low income, low access communities. Food Councils will also engage in solution oriented dialogue to combat food security issues, and take action to see those solutions realized in their communities. It is expected that coaching will be the difference between intervention and comparison communities in the success of using Voices for Food materials to develop sustainable Food Councils and successful MyChoice Food Pantries. Extension Objectives: Objective #1: Major Activities: Coaching efforts progressed as Extension Personnel (Project Coordinators) continued implementing the intervention in the selected communities, while shifting the focus of coaching activities to long term sustianability, and implementing the components of the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit within the Food Pantry. Data Collected: Throughout Year 4, ongoing data collection was completed in all states using the Training Tracking Form and the Community Observations Tracking Form. Additionally, the project team in all states engaged in mid-point data collection. Each state formed a data collection team led by Project Investigators and Project Coordinators to collect each piece of data during the mid-point data collection time point. Summary of Statistics & Discussion of Results: There are no summary of statistics to report for the mid-point data collected in Year 4, as our evaluation focuses on drawing a comparison from pre-intervention, mid-point and post-intervention timepoints. All data will be analyzed after post-intervention data collection. However, preliminary work has been completed to analyze baseline data (n=254). Of this sample, 70.4% were female, 28.6% were male and 1% preferred not to answer. The 75.1% of the sample self reported as white. Additionally, 10.7% self reported as American Indian, 8.4% self reported as black, 3.4% self reported as Hispanic, .2% Asian, .2% Hawaiian, .9% Other and 1.1% preferred not to answer. Most (31.4%) of the sample were high school graduates. 70.4% of the sample lived in a house, condo or mobile home, 25.3% in an apartment, .8% in a room, .2% in hotel/motel or shelter or mission, 1% anywhere outside (streets, park) and 2.1% other. 74% of those individuals lived in the same place for the last 12 months, while 26% lived in another place within the last 12 months. 97.1% of the sample had a place to make a meal. 60.2% of the sample was not working at a job or business in the last week, 14.4% were looking for work, 20.1% were working at a job or business, 1.7% had a job but did not work in the last week. The reasons for not working varied but the biggest proportion (44.8%) was due to disability, and retirement (26.5%). Forms of transportation varied in the sample with 60.5% that drove, 21% had someone else drive them, 5.1% took public transportation, 10% walked, 2 % rode a bicycle, and 1.1% use Other. A large proportion of individuals (30.8%) lived alone, and (23.7%) with two people. The majority of the sample makes $15,000 or less per year. 65.2% of participants received SNAP benefits in the last 12 months, 87.7% received benefits from WIC in the last 12 months, only 4.5% received any meal deliveries from community programs. Nearly half (47%) of participants were considered Very Low Food Secure, 32.4% Low Food Secure, 13% Marginally Food Secure, and 7.7% were Food Secure. Furthermore, participants were asked if a doctor or other health professional told them that they or anyone in their household had high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, or food allergies had told them. Of the sample size, 51.8% reported high blood pressure, 35.8% reported high cholesterol, 32% reported diabetes, 21.7% reported obesity and 10.1% reported food allergies. There were 29.9% who reported zero conditions, 25% reported 1 condition, 19.9% reported two conditions, 15.5% reported three conditions, 8.2% reported four conditions, and 1.5% reported 5 conditions. These baseline data were analyzed to describe the population we sampled at before intervention efforts began and are in line with what the Project Team expected. We will conduct the same analyses with mid-point and post- intervention data. Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: The Project Team doesn't yet have statistical data to support changes in actions or knowledge, in the 12 intervention communities. Changes in knowledge: Formation of food councils (structure, governance, sustainability) Benefits of MyChoice in pantries. Benefits of engaging a diverse network of stakedholders Changes in action: A diverse network of food system stakeholders engaged in food council work Budget requests sent to Voices for Food team Outside funding secured for council and pantries Objective #2: Completed in past years Objective #3: Will be complete in Year 5 and a potential Year 6 no-cost extension. Research Objectives: Objective #1: Completed in past years Objective #2: In progress Objective #3: In progress Objective #4: Will be completed in year 5 and a potential Year 6 no-cost extension. Objective #5: Will be completed in year 5 and a potential Year 6 no-cost extension.

Publications

• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2016 Citation: Stluka S, Moore L, Contreras D, Eicher-Miller HA, Franzen-Castle L, Henne R, McCormack LA, Mehrle D, Remley D. Voices for Food: Bridging the Gap in Multi-State Collaborative Grant Efforts. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Conference, July 2016, San Diego, CA. Poster Presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2016 Citation: Duitsman P, Moore L, Mehrle D. Building Local Food Council to Improve Community Food Security. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Conference, July 2016, San Diego, CA. poster presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2016 Citation: Duitsman P, Moore L, Mehrle D. Building Local Food Council to Improve Community Food Security. UMO Extension Conference.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2016 Citation: Jacobs AG, Bailey RL, Craig BA, Mattes RD, Eicher-Miller HA. An evaluation of dietary patterns among a sample of Midwestern adult emergency food pantry users by food security status. Purdue University Graduate School Office of Interdisciplinary Graduate Program Poster Competition, May 2, 2016, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN, poster presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2016 Citation: Wright B, McCormack LA, Stluka S, Contreras D, Franzen-Castle L, Henne B, Mehrle D, Remley D, Eicher-Miller HA. Diet quality and characteristics differ among food secure and food insecure emergency food pantry users. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior Conference, July 2016, San Diego, CA. minisymposium.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2016 Citation: Remley, D, Nordin, S, Harrigan, Sankavaram, K, Panelist. "Food Insecurity: Double Burden of Malnutrition." Presented at Society of Nutrition Education and Behavior. San Diego, (2016) Peer-Review

Progress 01/01/15 to 12/31/15

Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period, Voices for Food team members began working extensively with the selected intervention communities (2 interventions per state for a total of 12 intervention communities). Additionally, all materials used for Voices for Food were distributed to the remaining 12 comparison communities. There are many individuals and groups that are reached by our efforts in the selected communities. One target audience in the selected communities are economically disadvantaged groups that utililze food pantries. Another target audience are the community stakeholders and food system partners engaged in food council work which reaches the community at large including, children, groups of all races and ethnicities and families. Changes/Problems:One major change has occured in this reporting year. We originally anticipated collecting mid-point data at the end of this year (Year 3) and beginning of next year (Year 4). We have changed the dates for mid-pointdata collection to August/September of 2016 instead. There were many things that influenced this decision including: there was not ample time for the intervention to take hold prior to collecting mid-point data, and collecting data requires a great amount of travel sparking concerns about weather conditions during the winter. Furthermore, there are some pantries that do not have the space inside to collect data, so data collection is done outside, under a tent. Winter conditions do not create a safe environment for data collection. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?During this reporting year, all Voices for Food members attended the Society for Nutrition, Education and Behavior Conference in PIttsburgh, PA for professional development. In addition, we met the night before the conference started to hold our annual Voices for Food face-to-face meeting where we reviewed a synopsis of our baseline data. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?The Voices for Food team is committed to continuing along the current path of progress. Bi-monthly meetings with the Project Team and Project Coordinators with minutes will continue to be held throughout Year 4 to ensure the Voices for Food project is moving forward. All Voices for Food planned activities are documented in the Timeline and Milestone section. The Voices for Food team has developed primary goals to work towards in Year 3 and are listed below. Activities: Community Coaching engagement in selected intervention communities. Utilization of the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide to continue to develop or strengthen Food Policy Councils in all selected intervention communities. Utilization of the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit to continue to transition to a Guided Client Choice My Choice structure. Project Coordinators conduct ongoing process evaluation in regards to the Community Level, and Pantry Level in all selected communities. Ongoing support and training as needed for the Project Team and Project Coordinators. Expected Outputs: Face-to-face meeting- The project team will meet face to face once in Year 4. The meeting will serve as a time to refresh the team on data collection methods and begin looking at the methods for the delayed intervention in comparison communities. Furthermore, the meeting will be held in conjunction with Society for Nutrition, Behavior and Education's Annual Conference to support professional development. Food Policy Council Meeting- Each state will fully implement the intervention in intervention communities utilizing the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide. In Year 4 we expect that each intervention community will hold monthly Food Policy Council Meetings, complete the Annual Budget Plan and Justification for the second time and with the Project Coordinators serving as the community coach, begin to impact food security in a positive way. Food Pantry changes: Each state will fully implement the intervention in intervention communities utilizing the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit. The pantry will work with Food Policy Council to make changes at the pantry level. In Year 4 we expect that each intervention community will fully transition participating food pantries to a MyChoice model and complete all trainings provided in the toolkit. The pantry will work with the Food Policy Council in their community to complete the Annual Budget Plan and Justification for the second time to include the needs of the pantry within the budget. Mid-intervention data collection: The project team will collect mid-intervention data utilizing the tools described in the Summary of Data Collection Methods for VFF Evaluation table. Expected Outcomes & Impacts: In Year 4 we expect further changes in knowledge through the use of the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit to occur. As food policy councils work in their communities to enhance food security, we expect changes in knowledge of community resources, changes in actions of the community stakeholders, particularly food pantries, and a greater availability of healthy foods for all. In Year 4 we are hopeful that we will present Voices for Food at a conference. We hope to provide a presentation on our methods, some baseline data and expected outcomes. Drafting of a peer-reviewed process manuscript describing the methodology utilized in Voices for Food. The process paper will serve as a reference for future papers regarding Voices for Food. Drafting of two peer-reviewed manuscripts regarding hypotheses related to the baseline data that has been collected.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? The goal of this project is to enhance food security in selected diverse rural communities with high poverty rates by: 1) Developing new or providing support to existing FPCs in those selected communities; and 2) Encouraging FPCs in those communities to make policy changes in local food pantries to increase the availability of, and access to healthy food, and move them towards guided client choice systems, which include an integrated nutrition education component. Implementation of the intervention in the selected communities has begun. As a result of beginning the intervention, changes in knowledge, actions and conditions in the intervention communities has occurred. Along with the release of the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit and the Voices for Food: Food Council Guide, valuable community coaching experiences have occurred. The change in knowledge and coaching has spurred action in the 12 intervention communities, prompting the formation of food policy councils with diverse representation for food system stakeholders. The formation of food policy councils has resulted in a change in conditions in the intervention communities. Many food policy councils have created mission statements, vision statements and yearly goals to achieve during this calendar year. Progress has been made in the 12 intervention communities on the food policy council goals. Progress on goals has been aided by the application for mini-grant funds. Food polciy councils are partnered with participating food pantries in their community to asess needs and develop budget requests that meet both the needs of the greater community and the food pantry. Several of the selected communities have applied for and been approved for mini-grants that have been used in both the food policy councils and the food pantries to help them to achieve their goals for this year. Mini-grants have been used for a wide array of goals but include but are not limited to funding to aid food pantries in moving toward My Choice, funding for communty gardens that supply food pantries and those in the community, and funding to support training for pantry staff and volunteers, council members, and pantry clients. The formation of food policy councils and the progress made on the goals of those councils impact the target population and the community at large as we work towards creating an increase in food security in the selected communities. Extension Objectives: 1. Twelve communities will: develop a new or support an existing FPC; provide support to the local FPC to increase the availability of healthy food at the local food pantries; provide support to the local FPC to make policy changes to improve local food pantries by moving them towards a guided client choice system; provide integrated nutrition education to food pantry staff and volunteers to assist clients with making healthy food choices; and, provide integrated nutrition education to clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families. Voices for Food Project Coordinators have begun coaching activities in selected intervention communities. Coaching has been geared toward the gathering of food system stakeholders to form food policy councils to address food security issues within the community. Food policy councils have made significant progress in organizing themselves to be sustainable and effective by developing mission and visions statements, goals and applying for mini-grants. Food policy councils are partnered with a food pantry in each community to provide support in transitioning the pantry to a My Choice model of distribution. Many communities have begun working toward the transition with the support of food policy councils. Furthermore, integrated nutrition education has been provided to food pantry staff, volunteers and clients of local food pantries to assist them in making healthy food choices and preparing healthy, appetizing meals for themselves and their families.Ongoing process data has been collected quarterly in regards to council formation, trainings that have occured, and the transition to My Choice during this reporting period. The data collected quarterly wil be compiled and analyzed at the end of the project period. To date, there are no statistics or results to discuss. Formation of food policy councils, transition to My Choice, collection of process data are the key outcomes realized. 2. A Voices for Food kit of evidence-based best practices for developing FPCs, implementing a guided client choice system, and offering integrated nutrition education appropriate for clients of pantries will be assembled and provided to the 24 communities. The Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide and the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit have both been developed and diseminated to the selected communities. The guide and toolkit materials are influcening the knowledge, actions and conditions in the selected communities by educating those using the toolkits on food policy councils, My Choice, Cultural competency, food safety and nutrition. So far, changes in actions in those communities has occured as food policy councils have been formed, trainings have occured and goals have been completed, which influence the conditions in the community.To date, the full set of data (pre-, mid- and post-) has not been collected.To data, there are no statistics or results. The outcome of the developement of the guide and toolkit have been realized. 3. Disseminate results via technology, and through face-to-face local, state and national conferences. No activities have been completed for this objective to date. Research Objectives: 1. Identify and/or develop assessment tools to measure changes in food security that will be pilot-tested in selected communities. All assessment tools have been developed and pilot tested for reliability in selected for use. The assessment tools have also been used to collect pre-intervention data. Ongoing process data has been collected during this reporting period regarding the formation of food policy council, the progress on My Choice in pantries and other relevant information going on in the community. There are no statistics or results to discuss at this time. The outcome of the development of assessments tools has been realized. 2. Test the following hypothesis: Having Extension Educators engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs; that greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs; and that greater improvement in food security will occur in those communities that have stronger FPCs that move food pantries towards a guided client choice system. Work toward this objective has begun as we have coaches engaged with the FPCs in the intervention communities. To date, they are working towards developing strong FPCs and transitiong to My Choice in pantries which will lead to greater improvements in food secutiry in those communities.To date, the full set of data (pre-, mid- and post-) has not been collected. To date, there are no statistics or results to discuss.No key outcomes have been realized to date for this objective. 3. Assess the perceived value of the Voices for Food kit to the community in developing or improving FPCs. The Voices for Food team is collecting ongoing process data to contribute to knowledge on this topic at the end of the project period. To date, we are collecting data in an ongoing manner on this topic. To date, there are no statistics or results to discuss.

Publications

• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Jacobs A, Craig B, Bailey R, Mattes R, Eicher-Miller HA. An evaluation of meal patterns among a sample of adult emergency food pantry users in Central Northwestern Indiana. Experimental Biology Conference, March 2015, Boston, MA. minisymposium.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Dunlap K, Eicher-Miller HA. What types of foods are offered at food pantries? A cross-sectional analysis of three Indiana food pantry inventories. Summer Research Opportunity Program Final Presentations, July 23, 2015, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, oral presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Jacobs AG, Craig BA, Bailey RL, Mattes RD, Eicher-Miller HA. An evaluation of the meal patterns among a sample of adult emergency food pantry users in Central Northwestern Indiana. Purdue University Graduate School Office of Interdisciplinary Graduate Program Poster Competition, April 1, 2015, W. Lafayette, IN, poster presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Jacobs AG, Craig BA, Bailey RL, Mattes RD, Eicher-Miller HA. An evaluation of the meal patterns among a sample of adult emergency food pantry users in Central Northwestern Indiana. Purdue University Scholarship of Engagement Conference, March 4, 2015, W. Lafayette, IN, poster presentation.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Franzen-Castle, L., Fischer, J., Wielenga, V., Sale, B. Kroupa, M., Reich, J. Voices for Food: Utilizing Food Policy Councils to Bridge the Gap between Food Security and Healthy Food Choices. Joint NCEA and Extension Fall Conference, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension. Kearney, NE, November, 2015.
• Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Franzen-Castle, L., Fischer, J., Wielenga, V., Sale, B. Kroupa, M., Reich, J. Voices for Food: Utilizing Food Policy Councils to Bridge the Gap between Food Security and Healthy Food Choices. Rural Futures Conference, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. October, 2015.
• Type: Other Status: Accepted Year Published: 2015 Citation: Stluka, S., McCormack, L. Growing Healthy Communities and Families: Using the Land Grant Mission of Research, Education and Extension. Avera/SDSU Research Day. 2015

Progress 01/01/14 to 12/31/14

Outputs
Target Audience: Nothing Reported Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? In Year 2, there were twoopportunities for professional development relevant to Voices for Food at face to face meetings. Both trainings involved hands on activity and role playing. - Members of the project team participated in a Community Coaching training led by Dr. Mary Emery of South Dakota State University (SDSU). Community coaching is a critical component within the intervention. The training involved a review of a Community Coaching Guide developed by Dr. Mary Emery, and an active role playing session to develop Coaching skills in Community Coaching within the project team. As we implement the intervention this skill will be critical for the Project Coordinators, who will serve as the community coach. The training emphasized the importance of key skills in community coaching that will provide for long term sustainability after the funding period is completed. - All members of the project team engaged in a Facilitative Leadership training. Practicing facilitative leadership skills will be especially important while serving as a community coach. The training included the review of facilitative leadership processes and several active role playing scenarios with the full group utilizing different decision making models. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? The Voices for Food team is committed to continuing along the current path of progress. Full group meetings, project coordinator meetings and subcommittee meetings with minutes will continue to occur each month in Year 3 to ensure progress is made towards the established goals. All Voices for Food planned activities are documented in the Timeline and Milestones section of the Project Narrarative. The Voices for Food team has developed primary goals to work towards in Year and are as follows: 1. Utilization of the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide to continue to develop or strengthen Food Policy Councils in all selected intervention communities. 2.Utilization of the Voices for Food:Food Pantry Toolkit with coaching techniques to continue to transition to a Guided Client Choice MyChoice structure. 3. Conduct ongoing process evaluation in regards to the Community Level, and Pantry Levelin all selected communities. 4. Food Policy Council Meetings- Each state will fully implement the intervention in intervention communities utilizing the Voices for Food: Food Council Creation Guide. In Year 3 we expect that each intervention community will hold multiple Food Policy Council Meetings, complete the Annual Budget Plan and Justification and with the Project Coordinators serving as the community coach, begin to impact food security in a positive way. 5. Food Pantry changes: Each state will fully implement the intervention in intervention communities utilizing the Voices for Food: Food Pantry Toolkit. The pantry will work with Food Policy Council to make changes at the pantry level. In Year 3 we expect that each intervention community will fully transition participating food pantries to a MyChoice model and complete all trainings provided in the toolkit. The pantry will work with the Food Policy Council in their community to complete the Annual Budget Plan and Justification to include the needs of the pantry within the budget.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? FPCs can increase the availability of, and access to nutritious food, thus improving food security in rural food deserts. FPCs determine and drive what food is available in food pantries and how that food is offered to the clients (pre-selected boxes or bags, or client choice). This project is unique in that some of the communities that will be involved already have well-established FPCs, while others do not. Our intent is to gain broad knowledge about the impact of FPCs on food security, as some states will be assisting communities in developing new FPCs, and other states will be providing additional support to strengthen existing FPCs. The Voices for Food team has made significant progress in the area of planning and development of assessment tools and materials for use in communities. Project Coordinators in each state have begun engaging selected communities. Engaging the selected communities is a significant step towards accomplishing short term outcomes and long term impacts. Since this is a newer project, we are just in the beginning stages of gathering impacts and engaging communities. However we feel that this project will have a potential impact on the following: 1. Greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with FPCs. 2. Having Extension professionals engaged with communities through community coaching will lead to stronger FPCs. 3. Food Policy Councils in intervention communities will increase the availability of healthy foods in local food pantries. 4. Food pantries in the intervention communities will move towards a guided client choice system, with integrated nutrition education. 5. Greater improvement in food security will occur in communities with food pantries that use a guided client choice system, including integrated, targeted nutrition education.

Publications

Progress 01/01/13 to 12/31/13

Outputs
Target Audience: Nothing Reported Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Nothing Reported How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? The Voices for Food team is committed to continuing along the current path of progress. Bi-monthly meetings with minutes will continue to be held throughout Year 2 to ensure the Voices for Food project is moving forward. All Voices for Food planned activities are documented in the Timeline and Milestone section. The Voices for Food team has developed primary goals to work towards in Year 2 and are as follows: Finalize evaluation plan and instruments. Submission of IRB approval packages. South Dakota State University as the lead institution will submit the first IRB. Upon approval, each state will submit IRBs to their individual university Institution Review Board. Development of data collector training package and guidelines. Train project team and project coordinators in community coaching techniques. Individual states begin working with pantries to recruit survey respondents. Project coordinators in each state will be the primary personnel working with the food pantries. Individual food pantries conduct pre-surveys (Clients, Community Stakeholders, and Pantry Staff). Project coordinators will monitor this ongoing process. Begin implementation of project by local Project Coordinators developing new or assisting existing Food Policy Council. Ongoing support and training as needed for the Project Team and Project Coordinators. Collection of implementation data.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? The Voices for Food team has made significant progress in the planning and development of assessment tools in preparation for the evaluation that will take place in Years 2-4. To date, no contact has been made with communities eligible to be identified as intervention and comparison sites; however, state project coordinators have started to assess communities using the “Steps for Pre-Recruitment of Intervention and Comparison Communities and Food Pantries for Engagement in Voices for Food” document. As identified previously this evaluation tool was developed to guide each state in a step-by-step process for selecting two intervention communities and two comparison communities that will participate in the remainder of the four year research project. The document is crucial in ensuring that all states are consistent when determining what communities will be invited to participate so that consistent outcomes can be established at baseline for effective evaluation throughout the entire research project. The team will be ready to start contact with communities in Year 2 of the project, as outlined in the original proposal timeline, which is consistent with the original goals and objectives. The team has been working with the evaluation consultant and statisticians to develop and/or identify assessment tools to measure food security, and the goals/objectives of the grant project. Subcommittees have been formed under the following categories: Data Analysis, Food Policy Council, Food Pantry, Cultural Competency, Community Coaching, Recruitment, Evaluation, Dissemination & Sustainability, and Evaluation. The Voices for Food team holds bi-monthly meetings via the web to maintain forward progress towards the goals. Subcommittee chair meetings are also held bi-monthly and help the subcommittees to stay connected and on track with the original project goals and objectives. The Voices for Food team members have been asked to join and become involved in the eXtension Community of Practice (CoP) that is already aligned with health promotion and food security, such as the Community, Local and Regional Food System. Revision to the Logic Model presented in the original proposal. The revised logic model for program planning includes detailed addition in the areas of organizational levels. The new organizational levels include outcomes for the individual level, organization level and the community level.

Publications