Double Up Food Bucks: A Qualitative Evaluation of Usage, Impact, Barriers, and Facilitators

Masci, Jaclyn M.; Schoonover, Julia J.; Vermont, Leah N.; Kasprzak, Christina; French, L; Leone, Lucia A.

doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2020.07.005

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our qualitative findings are similar to those of other studies that find incentive program participants like and appreciate the program [23,24]. Our study respondents consistently appreciated participating in CNIP.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Most other studies of farmers' market incentive programs have used small sample sizes and many use self-reported measures and weak study designs. The most consistent finding related to the impact of point-of-purchase incentive programs on participants is related to produce expenditures and/or purchases, and studies consistently report these programs are associated with an increase in produce purchases among participants [20,[24][25][26]. The impact of incentive programs on produce consumption and food security, however, is less clear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The California Nutrition Incentive Program: Participants’ Perceptions and Associations with Produce Purchases, Consumption, and Food Security

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the associations of a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) point-of-purchase financial incentive program at farmers’ markets with produce purchase, consumption, and food security outcomes. We conducted cross-sectional, interviewer-administered intercept surveys with 325 adult SNAP participants at six incentive programs, five comparison farmers’ markets, and nine comparison supermarkets in California in the summer of 2018. The program provided dollar-for-dollar point-of-purchase incentives with $10 or $20 maximum at participating farmers’ markets. We measured produce consumption by an NCI screener; food security by the USDA 6-item screener; and program satisfaction with open-ended questions asked of a subsample. The quantitative analysis involved multilevel linear and logistic regression, adjusted for covariates. Qualitative data were coded and analyzed thematically. Shoppers at farmers’ markets offering $20 incentives had significantly higher odds of purchasing most of their produce at farmers’ markets than shoppers at $10 incentive (3.1, CI: 1.1, 8.7) or comparison markets (8.1, CI 2.2, 29.7). Incentives were not associated with quantitatively measured produce consumption. Each additional incentive dollar was associated with reduced odds of food insecurity (0.987, CI 0.976, 0.999). Participants appreciated the program; supermarket shoppers lacked awareness. Point-of-purchase incentives are appreciated and underutilized. Further understanding of optimal program design for produce consumption and food security impact is needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%