A Cornell Cooperative Extension Program Developed through Community Engaged Research

1. A Cornell Cooperative Extension Program Developed through Community Engaged Research Ardyth Gillespie, Suzanne Gervais, Patricia Thonney, Kathy Dischner, Chris Gutelius, Helen Howard, Loree Symonds, Holly Gump, Laura Smith, Jessica Schillawski, Lindsay Krasna and Rebecca Johnson ADA Food & Nutrition Conference & Expo Denver, Colorado October 17-20, 2009

2. Context Childhood obesity (Ogden et al, 2008; Wang, 2007) Family food decision-making framework (Gillespie and Gillespie, 2007) The importance of family meals (Herbst and Stanton, 2007; Larson et al, 2006) Experiential Learning Theory(Kolb, 1984)

3. Family Food Decision Making Framework FOOD & EATING GOALS and PRIORITIES Tradeoffs Policies Routines Assess Alternatives Not Satisfactory Satisfactory Food Event Decide Implement

4. Experiential learning Concrete Experience (feeling) Reflective observation (watching) Active Experimentation (doing) Abstract Conceptualization (thinking) Kolb, David A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J

5. CTFM proposal • CTFM proposal 2006 • Builds on Cooking up Fun experiential learning approach (Thonney, 1998; Kolb, 1984) • Family Food Decision-making framework (Gillespie and Gillespie, 2007) • Limited funds: • $25K/yr Smith Lever grant / 5 counties 3 years • CTFM project expansion 2009: • Supported by the Cornell Cooperative Extension Director's Innovation Fund, and • Special Project Fund from the Assistant Dean of the College of Human Ecology, Cornell University • Human capital

6. Cooking Together for Family Meals Objectives: Increase vegetable consumption Improve food preparation skills Encourage family meals at home Foster positive parent-child food related interactions Series of 6 classes 4 to 6 parent-child pairs / class Children targeted age: 8-15 yrs old 2007, 2008 and 2009 18 series; 200 participants; 73 families

7. Synergistic development process Capitalizes on educators knowledge, experience and skills in program delivery Borrows from multiple implementation strategies and theories Brings opportunities and challenges

8. Research THEORY Practice Community Engaged Research Methodology

9. Community Engaged Research Collaborative and experimental approach to develop CTFM CCE staff: region and 5 counties Participants Cornell faculty & students Community partners Formative research Partnership Principles* agree on common and complementary goals clarify roles and responsibilities develop working protocols commit the necessary resources create flexible, trusting relationships celebrate milestones and share credit *Gillespie, Gantner, Craig, Dischner, Lansing, JOE, 2003

10. CTFM collaboration in action All 5 counties* 5 series 21 families 56 participants 3 counties (C-T-O) 3 series 12 families 39 participants All 5 counties 9 series 40 families 105 participants SNE conf. ADA, AFHV, NIH, abstracts Staff training Staff training Series # 1 SNE abstract Staff training Series # 2 Series # 3 Series # 4 C-T O 2007 2008 2009 Debrief SWOT Lesson plans Revise program Goals Revise evaluation tools Explore funding Debrief/ Share / Revise C-T-O share experience with new counties St- Sc 4 meetings Program timeline / scope Logic model / MSC Facilitator Guide Evaluation Debrief/ Share / Revise Dietetic interns Debrief/ Share SWOT intern evals 3-mo follow-up eval Debrief / Share / Revise Trochim Eval. Proj. • Through summer 2009

11. CUCE-Tompkins: CTFM Pathway Model Created as part of the Evaluation Partnership project of the Cornell Office for Research on Evaluation

12. Monitoring & evaluation tools used for CTFM, 2008

13. Facilitator reported changes Increased use and variety of vegetables consumed including targeted vegetables One boy said, “I learned how to use fresh basil. I learned how to cook with kale. I learned how to peel and cut carrots.” Another participant said, “I didn’t know how easy it was to make soup using vegetables.” Improved cooking skills, especially knife handling “I let my child use a sharp knife, which I never did before.” “We learned how to measure the exact amount (of ingredients). And how to cut veggies the proper way.” Increased parent confidence in competencies of their children in the kitchen “I’ve gained a lot more patience with my daughter and recognize that her cooking skills are good enough to let her help in preparing meals at home.” “My kids are helping more in the kitchen.”

14. Facilitator reported changes Enhanced parent/child interaction around meal planning and preparation “My son actually got up early before school and helped me chop carrots, potatoes, onions and broccoli for a stew I was preparing for dinner. We talked, and it was really enjoyable.” “[My son will]…be helping with Thanksgiving dinner this year by making two dishes he learned to make in CTFM.” Recipes were well liked, and families prepared them at home “My son loved the pumpkin cornbread recipe so much that he made it for Thanksgiving dinner, and even my picky mother ate it, loved it, and wanted the recipe.” One 8-year-old boy said of the Pumpkin and Black Bean Soup, “This soup is so good. Could I take the rest home?”

15. Retrospective pre-post survey Increased skills & knowledge Increased consumption 81% Vegetables overall 60% Dark green leafy vegetables 57% Legumes 43% Orange vegetables (not carrots) 67% Cruciferous 29% Decreased fast food consumption Increased confidence in child abilities Reported child behavior changes Evaluation survey results, 2008-2009 % adult participants that: 78% Know how to use vegetables 60% Include vegetables in meals 49% Saute vegetables 44% Plan meals 37% Chop vegetables 95% Use knife safely 90% Help prepare meals 90% Be safe in kitchen 85% Help clean up after cooking 68% Practice food safety 88% increase in child interest in cooking 79% increase in frequency of children helping to prepare meals at home 36% increase in child vegetable consumption 68% Increased feeling good about cooking as a family or with child

16. Changes and intention to change in family food routines Parents Reported: • Child’s increased participation in food routines • Child is more willing to help, talks about what s/he learned and applies it at home, is safer in the kitchen, is more interested in helping and cooking, provides more inputs in meal planning • Improved family dynamics • More willing to accept help from child, have more confidence in child’s skills and behaviors, and enjoy more parent-child interaction • Families’ greater desire for healthier foods and eating together • Families discuss recipe adaptations, incorporate a variety of new foods in diet, eat together more often, participants are more aware of what they are feeding their family, and previously “picky eaters” now willing to eat new foods • Families intend to decrease meat and fat consumption, increase whole grains and beans in diet, maintain planning, preparing and cooking meals as a family

17. What parents appreciated most in CTFM • Quality time with children • Learning new skills • Safety issue awareness • Realizing children’s capabilities and developing new pride in their children • Making new friends • Cooking with fun • Going through the whole meal process in class • Responsive facilitators

18. Collaborative program development Program development Logic model and pathways (M. Duttweiler, B. Trochim ) SWOT analysis (M. Duttweiler & S. Dayton) CTFM facilitator guide (P.Thonney) Recipes targeting featured vegetables Field testing 2007-08 Facilitator Guide and staff training Monitoring and Evaluation tools Locally developed and adapted from FFDM, CUF Most significant change technique (M. Duttweiler) Retrospective pre-post survey (R. Johnson, dietetic intern) Long term follow-up (J. Schillawski dietetic intern, J.Tucker, DNS student) Family dynamic studies Interviews on family dynamics (J. Tucker, DNS student) Observations of family dynamics and identification of facilitator entry points to promote positive family interactions (L. Krasna, dietetic intern)

19. SWOT analysis results Opportunities + Expands on current FNEC programs, to target whole families + Due to economic downturn, more families are cooking at home + Opportunity to connect with local producers, WIC, schools, farmers markets, etc. + Need exists for this program Strengths + Changes in veggie consumption, cooking skills, family dynamics, and economic self-sufficiency + Impact beyond participant families & encourages community collaboration + Supports university/ community obesity prevention efforts + Program is attractive : it’s fun for kids and provides an opportunity for quality parent/child interaction • Threats • - Lack of impact data will jeopardize funding • - Perception that culinary skills are not linked • to childhood obesity/nutrition • Funder expectations • (content, scale of audience) Weaknesses - Lack of money to continue program - Labor intensive for nutrition educators - Untested evaluation tools - Lack of clarity of objectives/outcomes

20. 2009 Collaborative Engaged Research plans Collaborative reflection & analysis Develop further the CTFM program theory Solidify core program elements to deliver Identify lessons learned and best practices Revise the implementation process, including training Revise evaluation tools Products Revised evaluation tools Strategy to extend coverage and enhance program delivery Applications for funding / grants Packaging of current program

21. 2009 Evaluation plans • Process evaluation • Target population; content; human resources; staff training & motivation; cost • Interviews with facilitators & program managers, monitoring data, financial data • Impact evaluation • Behavior change: consumption, family dynamics, child participation, skills • Retrospective pre-post survey; in-depth interviews

22. Funding Supported by: Smith Lever funds from the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture The Cornell Cooperative Extension Director's Innovation Fund Special Project Fund from the Assistant Dean of the College of Human Ecology, Cornell University Additional support to CCE-Onondaga: The Syracuse City School District The Syracuse City Department of Parks and Recreation

23. “Cooking Together Team” County association staff:Kathleen Dischner & Cheryl Harper (CCE-Onondaga); Christine Gutelius and Rebecca Crawford (CCE-Cayuga) Helen Howard and Tina Foster (CCE-Tompkins); Loree Symonds and Jonathan Sterlace (CCE-Steuben); Robin Travis and Melissa Clary (CCE-Schuyler); Holly Gump (Food and Nutrition Education in Communities, Finger Lakes Nutrition Region) Cornell University Faculty and staff:Ardyth Gillespie, Suzanne Gervais , Pat Thonney, Susan Travis, Laura Smith and Paddy Redihan Cornell University Student and Dietetic Interns: Julie Tucker, Dawn Moses, Rebecca Johnson, Lindsay Krasna, and Jessica Schillwaski Additional Cornell University support: Monica Hargraves, Wendy Wolfe, CIT support staff