slide1 l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
SNAP- The View From FNS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
SNAP- The View From FNS

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 63

SNAP- The View From FNS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

SNAP- The View From FNS. Alice Lockett, MS, RD, LD. Senior Nutritionist. 2009 ASNNA Conference. A Time For Change. New Economic Challenges Improved Program Access Program Integrity Customer Service. Ending Childhood Hunger A Top Priority. Anti-Poverty Programs

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'SNAP- The View From FNS' - Pat_Xavi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

SNAP- The View From FNS

Alice Lockett, MS, RD, LD

Senior Nutritionist

2009 ASNNA Conference

a time for change
A Time For Change
  • New Economic Challenges
  • Improved Program Access
  • Program Integrity
  • Customer Service
ending childhood hunger a top priority
Ending Childhood HungerA Top Priority
  • Anti-Poverty Programs
  • Strengthening of Nutrition Assistance
  • Strong support from Department Leaders
historic changes to program
Historic Changes to Program
  • “SNAP” Launched Oct. 2008
    • Reflects focus on nutrition
    • Promotes healthy eating message
    • A symbol of the Modern Times
    • Puts Healthy Food Within Reach
  • State Names for SNAP
participation rates
Participation Rates
  • Increase of 13% in five years
  • Elderly population still difficult to reach
  • The newly eligible
    • Unfamiliar with process
    • States have fewer resources
  • Access and service remain paramount
a time for change7
A Time For Change
  • New Economic Challenges
  • Improved Program Access
  • Program Integrity
  • Customer Service
  • Significant health concerns
  • 66% of adults obese in 2003-2004
  • 17% of children 6 to 19 years old
  • Statistics are holding steady despite efforts
  • Nutrition MUST be the center of our program
food insecurity
Food Insecurity
  • Good News!- 90% of households are “Food Secure”
  • Hard to reach seniors and minority populations
  • Room for improvement
2008 farm bill
2008 Farm Bill
  • Farm Bill institutionalized SNAP priorities:
    • Access
    • Integrity
    • Nutrition
  • Implementation of Farm Bill provisions
farm bill highlights
Farm Bill Highlights
  • Nutrition Education
    • clarifies the legal basis and requirements for SNAP-Ed
  • Benefits Increased
    • Increase in minimum benefit
    • Standard deduction indexed to inflation
    • Cap for dependent expenses eliminated
farm bill highlights12
Farm Bill Highlights
  • Eligibility Expanded
    • Indexing asset limits to inflation
    • Excluding combat pay
    • Excluding most retirement and education accounts
farm bill highlights13
Farm Bill Highlights
  • Modernizing the Program
    • Acknowledge EBT as standard issue vehicle
    • Changing the name to SNAP
what are the fns core messages
What Are The FNS Core Messages
  • … a set of actions designed to assist mothers and children in making specific diet-related changes
fns core nutrition messages the products
FNS Core NutritionMessages: The Products
  • 16 Core Messages
    • 7 for moms of preschoolers
    • 4 for moms of 6-10 yr old kids
    • 5 for 8-10 yrs old kids
  • Supporting Content on 3 topics
  • Focus Group Reports
  • Guidebook
why do we need them
Why Do We Need Them?
  • FNS Programs reach millions of low-income
  • Nutrition Educators can speak with one voice, enhancing our ability to promote changes in dietary behavior
  • Many State and local Programs resources limited
putting the messages into practice
Putting the Messages into Practice
  • Messages support efforts to promote healthier USDA Foods.
  • Can be incorporated into:
    • Fact sheets, recipe booklets, other information
    • Guide can be used at all levels in FNS nutrition assistance Programs.
practical applications snap ed
Practical Applications: SNAP-Ed
  • SNAP-Ed Connection database
  • SNAP-Ed Connection Resource Library
  • Guide Highlighted as Resource of the Month
  • Guide is referred to in 2009.1 SNAP-Ed Guidance
where can i get this publication
Where Can I Get This Publication?

SNAP- The View From FNS

Melissa E. Walker, MBA, RD, LD


2009 ASNNA Conference

2009 federal snap ed funding
2009 Federal SNAP-Ed Funding
  • 52 State Agencies with Approved SNAP-Ed Plans
  • Approved Federal Funding (as of 02/09)
    • $353,396,630
    • 1890’s Funding- $1,745,777
    • CA with highest approved funding = $110,416,887
    • VT with lowest approved funding = $37,500

SNAP-Ed Annual Percent Change by Fiscal Year

1992 = $661,000 2009 = $353,396,711

* This represents Federal Funds ONLY

* Although % growth varies widely, all years except 1997 and 2005 showed a positive increase in SNAP-Ed approved funding from one year to the next.



avg annual growth rate for snap ed funding

(Funding Current Year – Funding Past Year)

X 100

Funding Past Year

Number of Years

Avg. % Annual Growth Rate for SNAP-Ed Funding

Average Annual Growth Rate-FY 03-09 = 8%

Average Annual Growth Rate- FY 92-97 = 809%

Average Annual Growth Rate-FY 98-02 = 51%

snap ed guidance
SNAP-Ed Guidance
  • No Substantive Changes
    • Name Update
    • Correction to space

allocation formula

    • Core Messages Reference
    • Revised Annual Final Report
  • In depth discussion tomorrow
  • Since ASNAA 2008
    • 7 regional trainings
    • Comprehensive Q/A document
    • 3 National Trainings on FPRS System
    • SNAP-Ed Connection EARS Resource Page
revised final annual report
Revised Final Annual Report
  • Eliminates redundancies with EARS
  • Highlights Key Elements not illustrated on EARS Form
  • Submitted for OMB approval 2/6/09
  • Relevant when EARS fully implemented
      • FY 2010 Plans (Due 11/30/10)
average teacher salaries
Average Teacher Salaries
  • Past practice used actual salaries
  • Reasonable way to reduce burden
  • Policy Dated 1/30/09 outlines parameters
    • Only those teachers providing SNAP-Ed
    • Calculated By School District (as applicable)
    • Includes fringe benefits
loving your family
Loving Your Family…
  • Significant utilization by all regions
  • Order Stats as of December 2008:
    • 4.9 million individual pieces ordered
    • Over 100,000 web hits
  • Possible future update
    • new name of SNAP
    • new 2010 DGA’s
eat smart live strong
Eat Smart Live Strong
  • The Wait Is OVER…almost
  • 2 Key Behaviors for healthy low-income 60-74 years olds
    • Increase Fruit and Vegetables to 3 ½ cups/day
    • Participate in at least 30 minutes of P.A.
eat smart play hard
Eat Smart Play Hard
  • New dedicated stock for SNAP-Ed providers
  • Available on first come first serve basis
  • Will announce availability on SNAP-Ed Talk
multi year plans
Multi-Year Plans
  • Year Regional Reports
    • Easy to follow templates
    • Shorter plans to review
    • Time Savings
    • Lack of long-term strategy
    • Program stability is key
multi year plans39
Multi-Year Plans
  • Where do we go from here?
    • Completion of Year 2
    • Conclusion of the Pilot – FY 2010
  • Analysis of Pilot
Web Site Stats
  • FY 2008 Annual Hits- 4,001,740
  • Monthly Average = 333,478 hits
  • Resource Finder Database – 356 resources
  • SNAP-Ed Talk- 407 members = 15% increase
  • Recipe Finder Database- 408 recipes available in both English and Spanish
Recipe Finder Database
  • Module translated into Spanish
    • Search in English or Spanish
    • View/Print recipes in English or Spanish

State Agency



SNAP-Ed Connection Information Super-Hub

  • Education Resources and Curriculums
  • Training Materials (EARS, Loving Your Family…)
  • Current Guidance and Policy Memos
  • SNAP-Ed Opportunities
    • Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation
    • Future Evaluations

SNAP- The View From FNS

Anita Singh, PhD

Family Programs Evaluation Branch Chief

2009 ASNNA Conference

healthy incentives pilot hip
Healthy Incentives Pilot (HIP)
  • The 2008 Farm Bill requires USDA to carry out pilot projects to develop, test and evaluate methods of using SNAP to improve the dietary and health status of households eligible for or participating in SNAP.
  • Specifically, it provides $20 million to test the effects of providing financial incentives at the point-of-purchase to encourage SNAP households to purchase fruits, vegetable or other healthful foods.
  • FNS conducted a public symposium in October 2008 with expert stakeholders to discuss the large number of nutrition, operational and evaluation options in designing HIP. Participants provided substantial information and a variety of views for consideration.
  • It is clear that the complexity of the pilot calls for a thoughtful approach to the design and implementation in order to ensure the best results for the most people.
  • Determining the targeted foods, incentive form as well as impact measures are integral to the success of this effort.
  • In FY 2009, FNS is completing the planning process for the demonstration and evaluation.
  • We expect to select the pilot sites in the winter of 2010.

SNAP- The View From FNS

Hoke Wilson, Ph.D.

Social Science Analyst

FNS Office of Research and Analysis

2009 ASNNA Conference

models of snap ed and evaluation
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

To demonstrate that nutrition education through SNAP can bring about meaningful behavioral change

To show that nutrition education implementers can mount meaningful intervention outcome evaluations

Project Purpose

models of snap ed and evaluation54
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

“Replicability”: The nutrition education intervention had to be replicable. This means that it must not require an unusually high level of resources. It also means that it is likely to adhere to SNAP-Ed Guidance. If it does not, then similar interventions face a decreased chance of being approved by other State SNAP agencies.

Selection Criteria

models of snap ed and evaluation55
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

“Evaluability”: The nutrition education intervention had to be evaluable. If we are going to write with confidence about the effectiveness of the selected projects, then we need to employ the most rigorous experimental – or at least quasi-experimental – design possible. This not only means that candidates for control group membership must be accessible, but also that the data necessary to identify them and confirm their similarities/differences to the treatment group(s) are complete and realistically attainable. Additionally, it means that the intervention, for practical reasons, had be staged between March and August of 2010.

Selection Criteria

models of snap ed and evaluation56
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

Last but Not Least: The nutrition education intervention must conduct its own, self-initiated outcome evaluation. The nature and methodology for the self-initiated outcome evaluation was – and will be - left entirely to the discretion of the nutrition educators.

Selection Criteria

models of snap ed and evaluation57
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

University of Nevada @ Reno “All 4 Kids” Intervention in Head Start Childcare Centers

2 lessons per week for 12 weeks (15 hours total) in child care center with behavioral messages of recognizing hunger signals and being “healthy, happy, active and fit at any shape or size”.

Conducted in 6 Acelero learning preschool centers (10 classrooms each, < 20 students per class).

FNS will evaluate children at an additional 6 Acelero control sites.

Selected Demonstration Projects

models of snap ed and evaluation58
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

Chickasaw Nation Nutrition Service “Eagle Play” Intervention

4-act play performed at aftershcool programs, followed by 4 lessons and “health homework reinforcing the messages of the play (increased F&Vs, balanced caloric intake). Indirect materials as well.

Target is pre-K through 3rd grade category II children at 6 elementary schools in Ada, Oklahoma (total of 8; 13 in Pontotoc County).

Selected Demonstration Projects

models of snap ed and evaluation59
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

Pennsylvania State University ‘Eating Competencies’ Web-based Intervention

Targeting SNAP eligible women, ages 18 – 45, promoting Satter’s Eating Competencies as an outcome.

PSU’s Outcome/impact self-evaluation is a sophisticated randomized control trial with the Nutrition Connection “administered” to the control as a placebo.

FNS will evaluate the impact of the intervention on fruit and vegetable consumption.

Selected Demonstration Projects

models of snap ed and evaluation60
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

NY State Dept. of Health ‘Eat Well, Play Hard’ in Childcare Settings (CACFP) Intervention

From March – September 2010, intervention will be staged in 156 eligible low-income childcare centers.

10 modules targeted to 3-4 year old children that last 20-30 minutes. Parents are also taught the curriculum by Registered Dieticians and their lessons last 30-60 minutes.

Behaviors to be modified relate to parents increasing the frequency and amounts of fruits & vegetables, and low-fat dairy served to their children.

Selected Demonstration Projects

models of snap ed and evaluation61
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

Current Demonstration Project Commonalities

All primarily rely on the techniques of direct education

All last no more than 6 months, running from the early spring through late summer of 2010.

All incorporate outcome evaluations that are, minimally, pre/post designs.

3 out of 4 target pre-school or early elementary school children

models of snap ed and evaluation62
Models of SNAP-Ed and Evaluation

If we were to assess another set of projects, what do YOU think the next wave of demonstration projects should look like??

What’s Next??