FFT Fact sheet

Food For Thought Nutrition Program Saskatoon

1. 20120907-FNS-LSC-0288

1. W HAT IS THE FOOD FOR THOUGHT NUTRITION PROGRAM?

2. W HAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT SCHOOLBASED NUTRITION PROGRAMS?

Food for Thought (FFT) is a school-based nutrition program administered by the Saskatoon Public Schools. In its inaugural year, 2012-2013, FFT involved 14 elementary schools and seven high schools. Funded by the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Public Schools partnered with the Saskatoon Health Region and the University of Saskatchewan in delivering and evaluating the FFT program.

According to research, children of the current generation may live shorter and less healthy lives than their parents due to childhood obesity.1 In order to reduce the rate of this epidemic, researchers have considered the school as an ideal setting to promote healthy behaviour such as nutrition programs. The school is an important environment for intervention because that is where an average child spends almost 50% of his or her waking hours.2 The school has the ability to reach children from diverse ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds and therefore provide an opportunity to explore the impact of a socio-ecological approach in solving problems.3 A school-based intervention like the FFT program has competitive advantages such as: maintaining continuous and concentrated contact with participants, conducting more cost-effective interventions, and presenting the intervention within the context of the children’s natural environment.

The Food for Thought program consists of the following components: 1. Promoting the consumption of fruits and vegetables by serving healthy breakfasts, snacks and lunches to students; 2. Implementing nutrition education using Canada’s Food Guide for children in all grades. Participating schools receive professional development training from the Health Region’s dietitians. The Saskatoon Public School Division offers a nutrition-positive manual and the province’s health curriculum guide to the schools as a resource; 3. Establishing learning gardens, including classroom-based gardens and community gardens, that can be housed either in the schoolyard or in a nearby park or neighbouring site. The garden initiatives are supported by community resources (e.g., Agriculture in the Classroom, senior citizens’ groups, etc.).

4. Displaying posters in the classrooms and in each school’s common areas to show positive nutrition-related visuals defining healthy food choices; 5. Encouraging parents to help with preparation and delivery of snacks, and nutrition-focused community events.

The Food For Thought research team comprised of: Nazeem Muhajarine, Scott Tunison, Rachel Engler-Stringer, Hassan Vatanparast, and researchers Duvaraga Sivajohanathan, Peter Boateng, and Luan M. Chu - all from University of Saskatchewan.

The aim of the FFT program is to support policies that promote healthy eating in school environments to reduce childhood obesity.

Food for Thought Evaluation Report | 1

2. Watermelon Kid

3. W HAT IS THE FOOD FOR THOUGHT EVALUATION STUDY AND WHAT ARE ITS GOALS? The Food for Thought evaluation study examines its implementation in its first year and assesses whether it is effective in improving selected factors related to student and school personnel outcomes. The broad goals for this evaluation are to: 1. Conduct research, in collaboration with the Saskatoon Public Schools, to identify how the FFT program promotes healthy eating in students; 2. Build capacity among partners in the schools, public health sector, and university for conducting research that focuses on interventions and programs; 3. Share the insights gained widely and in traditional and other creative ways to audiences locally, nationally and internationally.

In short, our aim is to produce useful knowledge about this school-based nutrition program and to help transform the way food is considered, shared and consumed in schools, and in the greater community.

In 2012, the Saskatchewan Population Health and Evaluation Research Unit was approached by Saskatoon Public Schools to evaluate how the FFT program and the broader policies that support it creates school environments that promote healthy eating in both students and staff.

4. H OW WAS THE FIRST YEAR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FOOD FOR THOUGHT PROGRAM IMPACT MEASURED? The evaluation for the first year addressed primary questions: 1. What is the quality of the school food environment in participating schools at baseline (i.e., winter 2013)?

2.

What is the measured effectiveness of the FFT program on selected areas of anticipated short-term change (dietary intake, knowledge, attitudes and skills of healthy eating)?

To answer these questions, researchers looked at data gathered from the FFT Student Questionnaire, a questionnaire administered to 250 students, selected randomly, from grades 4 through 8 in the spring of 2013 in 13 elementary schools where the FFT program has been implemented. This survey consisted of four sections: i. school-time food intake; ii. knowledge of healthy food; iii. attitudes towards healthy food; iv. abilities and skills in handling food.

2 | Food for Thought Evaluation Report

Distribution of Participants in Food for Thought Evaluation by School (n=249)

5. W HO ARE THE STUDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE EVALUATION? 250 students from grades 4 through 8 (typically aged 9-13) attending 13 elementary schools.

• •

51% are female, 49% are male 1% of students have been attending their current 6 school for three years or more

The graphs to the right show the distribution of participants by school and grade.

8.40%

Caroline Robins

9.60%

Caswell

Confederation Park 11.60%

7.20%

Fairhaven

9.20%

James L Alexander 4%

King George

Mayfair

4.80%

Pleasant Hill

5.20% 7.20%

Princess Alexandra

6. W HAT DID THE SCHOOL PERSONNEL SAY ABOUT SCHOOL FOOD ENVIRONMENT AND POLICIES? The general view expressed by school personnel suggests that the FFT program and other related food initiatives have contributed immensely to improve each schools’ food environment. However, three out of the 13 schools still consider hunger as a major problem among their students.

All schools have various policies for promoting healthy eating among students in place. These policies were adopted from the Saskatchewan Schools Division Food Policy, Healthy Promoting Schools and CHEP Program School Policies and the Ministry of Education’s Food Guidelines to create a healthy eating promotion plan for each school.

8.80%

Sutherland

8.40%

Vincent Massey Westmount

6.00%

WP Bate

9.60%

Grade Distribution (n=249)

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

18.10% 22.50% 20.90% 19.70% 18.90%

Food for Thought Evaluation Report | 3

3. 20120907-FNS-LSC-0546

7. KEY FINDINGS:

Participation in the Breakfast or Lunch Program in Food for Thought Schools (n=245)

I. School-time food intake The Food for Thought program offers breakfast and lunch programs in which students have the option of participating. While a majority of the students surveyed (52.2%) participate in either the breakfast or lunch program, 29.8% of students indicated that they do not participate and 18% did not know if they participate or felt that their school did not offer these programs.

Food Group

Recommended # of Servings/Day

Grain Products

6

Vegetables & Fruits

6

Milk & Alternatives

3-4

Meat & Alternatives

1-2

The percentage of students meeting Canada’s Food Guide’s recommended number of daily servings for fruits and vegetables and milk and alternatives is approximately three times higher for those participating in the meal program than for those not participating.

There was no difference seen between participants and nonparticipants of the meal program in meeting Canada’s Food Guide’s recommended number of daily servings for grain or meat and alternatives.

Participates in meal program

Yes 52.20%

No 29.80%

I don’t know/

My school doesn’t offer

18%

Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy Eating recommends the following number of servings per day for each of the four food groups for youth aged 10-13 years old.

Percentage of Students Meeting Canada’s Food Guide’s Recommended Number of Daily Servings in Food for Thought Schools 31.1%

30.4%

29.1%

17.2% 11.9% 7.4%

7.3%

6.3%

Does not participate in meal program Grain (n=150)

Vegetables & Fruit (n=163)

4 | Food for Thought Evaluation Report

Milk & Alternatives (n=169)

Meat & Alternatives (n=145)

4. Breakfast

The median number of servings consumed of fruits and vegetables and milk and alternatives during the school day is approximately 1.8 and 2.6 times higher, respectively, for those participating in the meal program than for those not participating. There was no difference seen between participants and non-participants of the meal program in the median number of servings consumed for grain or meat and alternatives.

Median Number of Servings During School Time in Food for Thought Schools 2 1.6 1.1 .7

.6 .4

Grain (n=150)

.3

Vegetables & Fruit (n=163)

Milk & Alternatives (n=169)

II. Knowledge of healthy food

.3

Meat & Alternatives (n=150)

Most students indicated having learned about foods grown in Saskatchewan (37.2%) and about Canada’s Food Guide (40.8%) at school. However, skills related to tasting and choosing healthy foods, grocery shopping and cooking were learned by most students at home, in the community or in a summer program.

Participates in meal program Does not participate in meal program

Have You Participated in Any of the Following this School Year?

Learning how to cook (n=241)

13.7%

54.8%

Cooking on my own (n=236) 5.5%

47.9%

Learning how to grocery shop (n=241) 5%

46.6%

57.3%

Choosing healthy foods (n=241)

14.5%

Tasting healthy foods (n=240)

13.8%

Learning about Canada’s Food Guide (n=238) Learning about foods grown in Saskatchewan (n=239) At school

31.5%

37.8% 68.9%

16.6%

67.1% 40.8% 37.2%

19.2% 31.1%

30.1%

Yes - other (at home, in community, in summer program)

28.2% 32.6%

No

Food for Thought Evaluation Report | 5

The graph below depicts students’ knowledge on whether certain foods are grown in Saskatchewan.

Do Farmers Grow the Following Foods in Saskatchewan?

Bananas (n=245)

18%

66.5%

Beans (n=246)

87%

Cranberries (n=244) 13.5%

6. Somers Middle School planting native garden

6 | Food for Thought Evaluation Report

25.8% 29.4%

17.4%

63.1% 72.8%

No

24.2%

29.8%

17.8%

12.8%

57.1%

52.9%

Pumpkins (n=243) Yes

22.7%

50%

Peppers (n=242) Pineapples (n=241)

6.9% 6.1%

64.5%

Corn (n=242)

Kale (n=245)

15.5%

19.1% 14%

13.2%

I don’t know where the food is grown/I’m not familiar with this food

5. Preparing the vegetable garden

Although a component of the Food for Thought program includes establishing learning gardens, only 17% of students reported having learned about growing food in a garden at school and only 4% reported having grown food in a garden on their own at school. The majority of students indicated that they did not learn about or practice growing food in a garden.

Where I Learned How to Grow Food in a Garden This School Year (n=245)

Where I Grew Food in a Garden on My Own This School Year (n=241)

At school 16.70%

At school

3.7%

Other 36.40%

Other

33.6%

(at home, in community, in summer program)

(at home, in community, in summer program)

I didn’t

learn this 46.90%

I didn’t learn this

62.7%

III. Attitudes towards healthy food The graph below depicts the attitudes of parents and guardians towards healthy eating as perceived by their children.

My Parent(s) or Guardian(s) Think I Should... (n=245) 73.3%

Eat vegetables at least once a day

61.1%

Eat whole grains at least once a day

32.8%

Eat packaged snack foods They don’t have an opinion

34.0%

13.4% 19.0%

36.0%

6.9% 8.9% 8.1%

17.0% 16.6%

32.8%

20.2%

Disagree a lot/a little

15.4% 19.0%

10.5%

56.7%

Drink bottled water

12.1% 63.2%

Drink tap water

Agree a little/a lot

10.9%

45.7%

Avoid soft drinks and sugar-sweetened beverages

Drink low-fat milk or a milk alternative

4.5%

31.2%

9.3% 13.4% 15.4% 12.6%

I don’t know what they think

Food for Thought Evaluation Report | 7

7. Pegpluscat learning to wash our fruit

IV. Abilities and skills in handling food While most students identified themselves as being very sure or somewhat sure of being able to drink tap water (78.3%) and eat vegetables once a day (75.9%), fewer students were very sure or somewhat sure they could prepare and chop vegetables (64.6%) or use a recipe to cook a simple dish (50.6%).

Use a recipe to cook a simple dish

Perceived Abilities of Students 50.6%

(n=247)

Prepare and chop vegetables (n=246) Eat vegetables at least once a day

(n=245)

Drink tap water

(n=244)

Very sure/somewhat sure I could

16.6% 64.6% 75.9% 78.3%

Not sure whether I could or could not

32.8% 7.7%

27.6% 7.8% 5.7%

16.3% 16%

Very sure/somewhat sure I could not

8. CONCLUSION This study represents an important school-based intervention aimed at improving the diets of students through increasing awareness of food, sourcing food, meal preparation, and changing attitudes towards eating healthy foods. The evaluation of the FFT program reported here, based on the initial year of operation, demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a targeted school-based intervention program and some early successes. The next steps for this program should include sustaining the program, strategic scaling up where feasible, and continuing commitment and advocacy for the program with the funder and within the educational sector.

REFERENCES Daniels SR, (2006). The consequences of childhood overweight and obesity.

The Future of Children. 2006;16(1):47-67. Available at: http://futureofchildren.org/futureofchildren/publications/docs/16_01_03.pdf 2 Naylor PJ, Macdonald HM, Reed KE, McKay HA. Action Schools! BC: A socioecological approach to modifying chronic disease risk factors in elementary school children. Preventing Chronic Disease. 2006;3(2). Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1563946/pdf/PCD32A60.pdf 3 Winson A. The demand for healthy eating: Supporting a transformative food “movement�. Rural Sociology. 2010;75(4):584-600. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2010.00033.x/full 1

PHOTO CREDITS 2 0120907-FNS-LSC-0288 by U.S. Department of Agriculture, http://flic.kr/p/ dbyBpQ. Licence at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

2 W atermelon Kid by Riley Kaminer, http://flic.kr/p/73dnvb. License at http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

3 2 0120907-FNS-LSC-0546 by U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://flic.kr/p/ dbyzYC. License at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

4 Breakfast by Natalie Maynor. http://flic.kr/p/c72zMJ. License at http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

5 P reparing the vegetable garden by Woodleywonderworks, http://flic.kr/ p/9rGq3H. License at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

6 S omers Middle School planting native garden by Forest Service - Northern Region, http://flic.kr/p/eD7Z7S. License at http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/2.0.

7 P egpluscat learning to wash our fruit by Ruby D, http://flic.kr/p/fNexGv. License at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.

8 | Food for Thought Evaluation Report

Layout by - SansKernDesign.ca

1