Evaluation of a USDA Nutrition Education Program for Low-income Youth

• Published in: Journal of nutrition education and behavior Vol. 38; no. 1; pp. 30 - 41
• Main Authors: Townsend, Marilyn S., Johns, Margaret, Shilts, Mical Kay, Farfan-Ramirez, Lucrecia
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 2006; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Age Distribution; Analysis of Variance; California; Child; child nutrition; Child Nutrition Sciences - education; children; Children & youth; Education; EFNEP; evaluation; Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program; Food Handling - methods; Health Education; Humans; impact indicator; Low income groups; low income households; Nutrition; nutrition education; Nutrition Instruction; Outcome Measures; Poverty - ethnology; program evaluation; Program Evaluation - methods; Randomized Controlled Trials; Reproducibility of Results; Sex Distribution; Statistical Analysis; Surveys and Questionnaires; United States; United States Department of Agriculture; USDA; USDA food and nutrition programs; Validity; youth; United States; California; evaluation; impact indicator; USDA; EFNEP; children; youth
• ISSN: 1499-4046; 1878-2620; 1708-8259
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2005.11.014

Examine effectiveness of a state’s Youth Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) and assess the validity of the federal impact indicator method for reporting program outcomes.
A randomized, controlled field trial of 229 groups with 5,111 youth, 9-12 years old, in community settings.
6- to 8- hour, 7-lesson education experience with food preparation and tasting, an education experience typical of EFNEP in California.
US Department of Agriculture (USDA) impact indicators: nutrition knowledge, eating a variety of foods, food selection, and food preparation and safety practices.
Analysis of covariance model controlling for pretest, gender, age, and ethnicity, with group nested in condition.
Organizing responses by impact indicators, treatment participants made significant gains on the posttest compared to controls for 3 of 4 indicators (
P < .008 to
P < .0001). Gains were made by 34 to 68% of youth participants for 4 indicators. The impact indicator method for federal reporting compared favorably with results from a randomized controlled trial with groups nested in conditions.
This is the first report in the literature of (1) a large evaluation study of Youth EFNEP and (2) an estimate of the validity of the USDA impact indicator method for reporting program outcomes.