Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

Robin DeWeese, Michael Todd, Allison Karpyn, Michael J. Yedidia, Michelle Kennedy, Meredith Bruening, Christopher Wharton, Punam Ohri-Vachaspati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65-3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32-2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6-14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0-13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)256-261
Number of pages6
JournalPreventive Medicine Reports
Volume4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

Food Assistance
Food
United States Department of Agriculture

Keywords

  • And nutrition
  • Diet
  • Food
  • Food assistance
  • Food environment
  • Nutrition surveys

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

@article{fc3ac9b5ed2647218bb0a28864de82ae,
title = "Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness",
abstract = "In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95{\%} CI 2.65-3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95{\%} CI 2.32-2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95{\%} CI 11.6-14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95{\%} CI 12.0-13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.",
keywords = "And nutrition, Diet, Food, Food assistance, Food environment, Nutrition surveys",
author = "Robin DeWeese and Michael Todd and Allison Karpyn and Yedidia, {Michael J.} and Michelle Kennedy and Meredith Bruening and Christopher Wharton and Punam Ohri-Vachaspati",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.06.018",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "256--261",
journal = "Preventive Medicine Reports",
issn = "2211-3355",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

AU - DeWeese, Robin

AU - Todd, Michael

AU - Karpyn, Allison

AU - Yedidia, Michael J.

AU - Kennedy, Michelle

AU - Bruening, Meredith

AU - Wharton, Christopher

AU - Ohri-Vachaspati, Punam

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65-3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32-2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6-14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0-13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

AB - In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65-3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32-2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6-14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0-13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

KW - And nutrition

KW - Diet

KW - Food

KW - Food assistance

KW - Food environment

KW - Nutrition surveys

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84977177275&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84977177275&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.06.018

DO - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.06.018

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 256

EP - 261

JO - Preventive Medicine Reports

JF - Preventive Medicine Reports

SN - 2211-3355

ER -