O41 Client Acceptability of School-Based Food Pantry Program for Rural Families in Southeast Tennessee

Abstract

BackgroundSchool-based food pantries (SBFP) are 1 way to address food insecurity among low-income families with children by offering nutritious food at a known, trusted, and easily accessible location. Although implementation has increased, there is still limited data on the client acceptability of SBFP compared to other school-based food program models, especially among rural schools.ObjectiveTo compare client acceptability, satisfaction, and preference between pilot SBFP and Sack Pack (SP) programs across 3 rural elementary schools in Southeast, Tennessee.Study Design, Setting, ParticipantsIn this cross-sectional study, a convenience sample (n = 25) of adult caregivers of children participating in SBFP were recruited to complete a self-administered survey, either on paper or through an online survey software (Question Pro).Measurable Outcome/AnalysisSurveys, based on an existing tool developed for a Feeding America school-based food pantry evaluation, were adapted, reviewed, and revised with the partnering food bank. The 33-item survey explored client satisfaction with variety, quality, quantity, and nutritional value of food offerings using Likert-type scales, client program perceptions using open-text responses, and demographics. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies and means, were calculated to compare client acceptability between SBFP and SP programs.ResultsA majority of participants were White (100%), non-Hispanic (96%) females (88%), who reported either excellent (40%) or very good (16%) self-perceived knowledge of food preparation skills. Participant feedback and satisfaction were uniformly positive for both programs; however, a majority preferred the food variety (68%), quality (68%), quantity (84%), nutritional value (76%), and convenience (64%) of the SBFP compared to the SP program. Participants reported feeding more household members with SBFP (mean = 3.9 ± 0.91) than the SP program (mean = 3.0 ± 1.02).ConclusionClients indicated acceptability of, satisfaction with, and preference for the SBFP. These findings support the continuation and expansion of SBFP at new sites to address food insecurity among low-income families with children. School-based food pantries (SBFP) are 1 way to address food insecurity among low-income families with children by offering nutritious food at a known, trusted, and easily accessible location. Although implementation has increased, there is still limited data on the client acceptability of SBFP compared to other school-based food program models, especially among rural schools. To compare client acceptability, satisfaction, and preference between pilot SBFP and Sack Pack (SP) programs across 3 rural elementary schools in Southeast, Tennessee. In this cross-sectional study, a convenience sample (n = 25) of adult caregivers of children participating in SBFP were recruited to complete a self-administered survey, either on paper or through an online survey software (Question Pro). Surveys, based on an existing tool developed for a Feeding America school-based food pantry evaluation, were adapted, reviewed, and revised with the partnering food bank. The 33-item survey explored client satisfaction with variety, quality, quantity, and nutritional value of food offerings using Likert-type scales, client program perceptions using open-text responses, and demographics. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies and means, were calculated to compare client acceptability between SBFP and SP programs. A majority of participants were White (100%), non-Hispanic (96%) females (88%), who reported either excellent (40%) or very good (16%) self-perceived knowledge of food preparation skills. Participant feedback and satisfaction were uniformly positive for both programs; however, a majority preferred the food variety (68%), quality (68%), quantity (84%), nutritional value (76%), and convenience (64%) of the SBFP compared to the SP program. Participants reported feeding more household members with SBFP (mean = 3.9 ± 0.91) than the SP program (mean = 3.0 ± 1.02). Clients indicated acceptability of, satisfaction with, and preference for the SBFP. These findings support the continuation and expansion of SBFP at new sites to address food insecurity among low-income families with children.