Physical Activity Opportunities in US Early Child Care Programs.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Physical activity provides health and developmental benefits to young children. The Study of Nutrition and Activity in Child Care Settings describes physical activity opportunities and sedentary occasions for children aged 1 to 5 years at programs participating in the US Department of Agriculture Child and Adult Care Food Program. METHODS: The Study of Nutrition and Activity in Child Care Settings obtained a nationally representative sample of classrooms within Child and Adult Care Food Program-participating Head Start and child care centers via multistage cluster sampling. For 1 observation day, an observer in each classroom tallied designated outdoor and indoor playspaces; minutes children spent in playspaces; barriers and facilitators to physical activity; and classroom time when most children were physically active (eg, walking, dancing), sedentary (seated, lying down), or neither. Weighted descriptive tabulations by program type compared outdoor physical activity opportunity counts and total physical activity opportunity durations to national guidelines. Multivariate regression analysis investigated association of barriers with physical activity opportunity duration. RESULTS: The sample included 227 classrooms, 96 in child care centers and 131 in Head Start programs. All had sedentary occasions outside meals, snacks, and naps; virtually all offered opportunities for physical activity. Seventy-four percent of programs met national guidance on sufficient number of outdoor opportunities, weather permitting. Just 50% met guidance of ≥60 to 90 minutes of physical activity, whereas only 43% met both sets of guidance. Weather and staff not joining in outdoor play were associated with 74 and 31 fewer minutes devoted to physical activity, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest ample room for improvement in provision of physical activity opportunities during child care.

A Summer Nutrition Benefit Pilot Program and Low-income Children's Food Security.

BACKGROUND: Federal summer meals programs serve less than one-sixth of children that receive free or reduced-price meals during the school year. To address this gap in food assistance for school-aged children, the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstrations provided summer food assistance in the form of electronic benefits transfer cards to households with school-aged children certified for free or reduced-price meals during the school year. METHODS: Over 2011-2013, the SEBTC demonstrations were evaluated by using a random assignment design. Households were randomly assigned a monthly $60-per-child benefit, a monthly $30-per-child benefit, or no benefit, depending on the study year. Key outcomes included children's food security and consumption of foods and food groups related to a healthful diet (diet quality). At baseline (in the spring) and again in the summer, the evaluation surveyed ∼52 000 households over the course of the 3 years of the impact study. RESULTS: SEBTC reduced the prevalence of very low food security among children by one-third. It also had positive impacts on 6 of the 8 child nutrition outcomes measured (amounts of fruits and vegetables; whole grains; dairy foods; and added sugars). CONCLUSIONS: SEBTC is a promising model to improve food security and the dietary quality of low-income school-aged children in the summer months.

Rebates to Incentivize Healthy Nutrition Choices in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Price incentives, or rebates, have been proposed as one promising strategy for improving diet quality among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants. This paper explores the existing evidence on effectiveness of rebates in this program. In particular, this paper considers findings from a recent RCT of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program rebates, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Healthy Incentives Pilot, in the context of the broader literature on rebate strategies. The paper concludes that rebates have a moderate impact on food intake, at moderate cost relative to alternative interventions. There is further evidence that implicit promotional effects may contribute to impacts of rebate interventions, beyond the impacts of price effects alone. However, existing studies on complementary effects of explicit promotion have been limited by relatively small sample sizes and correspondingly low power to detect differences. This appears to be a promising area for future research.