BACKGROUND: Policy makers are considering changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Proposed changes include financially incentivizing the purchase of healthier foods and prohibiting the use of funds for purchasing foods high in added sugars. SNAP participant perspectives may be useful in understanding the consequences of these proposed changes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether food restrictions and/or incentives are acceptable to food benefit program participants. DESIGN: Data were collected as part of an experimental trial in which lower-income adults were randomly assigned to one of four financial food benefit conditions: (1) Incentive: 30% financial incentive on eligible fruits and vegetables purchased using food benefits; (2) Restriction: not allowed to buy sugar-sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candies with food benefits; (3) Incentive plus Restriction; or (4) Control: no incentive/restriction. Participants completed closed- and open-ended questions about their perceptions on completion of the 12-week program. PARTICIPANTS/ SETTING: Adults eligible or nearly eligible for SNAP were recruited between 2013 and 2015 by means of events or flyers in the Minneapolis/St Paul, MN, metropolitan area. Of the 279 individuals who completed baseline measures, 265 completed follow-up measures and are included in these analyses. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: χ2 analyses were conducted to assess differences in program satisfaction. Responses to open-ended questions were qualitatively analyzed using principles of content analysis. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant or meaningful differences between experimental groups in satisfaction with the program elements evaluated in the study. Most participants in all conditions found the food program helpful in buying nutritious foods (94.1% to 98.5%) and in buying the kinds of foods they wanted (85.9% to 95.6%). Qualitative data suggested that most were supportive of restrictions, although a few were dissatisfied. Participants were uniformly supportive of incentives. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a food benefit program that includes incentives for purchasing fruits and vegetables and/or restrictions on the use of program funds for purchasing foods high in added sugars appears to be acceptable to most participants.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Policy makers are considering changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Proposed changes include financially incentivizing the purchase of healthier foods and prohibiting the use of funds for purchasing foods high in added sugars. SNAP participant perspectives may be useful in understanding the consequences of these proposed changes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether food restrictions and/or incentives are acceptable to food benefit program participants. DESIGN: Data were collected as part of an experimental trial in which lower-income adults were randomly assigned to one of four financial food benefit conditions: (1) Incentive: 30% financial incentive on eligible fruits and vegetables purchased using food benefits; (2) Restriction: not allowed to buy sugar-sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candies with food benefits; (3) Incentive plus Restriction; or (4) Control: no incentive/restriction. Participants completed closed- and open-ended questions about their perceptions on completion of the 12-week program. PARTICIPANTS/ SETTING: Adults eligible or nearly eligible for SNAP were recruited between 2013 and 2015 by means of events or flyers in the Minneapolis/St Paul, MN, metropolitan area. Of the 279 individuals who completed baseline measures, 265 completed follow-up measures and are included in these analyses. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: χ2 analyses were conducted to assess differences in program satisfaction. Responses to open-ended questions were qualitatively analyzed using principles of content analysis. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant or meaningful differences between experimental groups in satisfaction with the program elements evaluated in the study. Most participants in all conditions found the food program helpful in buying nutritious foods (94.1% to 98.5%) and in buying the kinds of foods they wanted (85.9% to 95.6%). Qualitative data suggested that most were supportive of restrictions, although a few were dissatisfied. Participants were uniformly supportive of incentives. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a food benefit program that includes incentives for purchasing fruits and vegetables and/or restrictions on the use of program funds for purchasing foods high in added sugars appears to be acceptable to most participants.
Authors: Cindy W Leung; Suzanne Ryan-Ibarra; Amanda Linares; Marta Induni; Sharon Sugerman; Michael W Long; Eric B Rimm; Walter C Willett Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Cindy W Leung; Eric L Ding; Paul J Catalano; Eduardo Villamor; Eric B Rimm; Walter C Willett Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2012-10-03 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Lisa Harnack; J Michael Oakes; Brian Elbel; Timothy Beatty; Sarah Rydell; Simone French Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Michael W Long; Cindy W Leung; Lilian W Y Cheung; Susan J Blumenthal; Walter C Willett Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Sruthi Valluri; Susan M Mason; Hikaru H Peterson; Simone A French; Lisa J Harnack Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 4.022