Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
9.2
4.8
Journals
Nutrients
Special Issues
Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to...
nutrients-logo
Submit to Special Issue Submit Abstract to Special Issue Review for Nutrients Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to Food Security

A special issue of Nutrients (ISSN 2072-6643). This special issue belongs to the section "Nutritional Policies and Education for Health Promotion".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 25 August 2025 | Viewed by 7759

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Sarah Moreland-Russell

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
Interests: public health policy; policy implementation; dissemination; program sustainability; child and youth well-being; federally assisted food programs
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Dan Ferris

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor
The Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
Interests: social policy; food insecurity; policy and program design; barriers to access; food as medicine; child nutrition programs; federal nutrition assistance programs

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Over 1 in 5 children in the United States live in a food-insecure household. Policies and programs within educational settings play a critical role in health and educational outcomes, particularly for young populations experiencing racial and economic inequities. Multiple federally assisted child nutrition programs operating in educational settings aim to provide nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free meals to children across the US. However, significant gaps remain for achieving equity in nutrition security during youth and into early adulthood. This Special Issue welcomes research that documents the design, testing, evaluation, implementation and dissemination of programs and policies with an equitable approach to addressing food insecurity in education settings. Research can be focused in childcare, k-12 or college settings, but should highlight approaches to achiving nutritional equity. Drs. Moreland-Russell and Ferris have focused their research on nutritional equity in the United States and Missouri; nevertheless, submissions from diverse global geographies are encouraged. Dr. Ferris’s work has specifically highlighted the need for innovative service delivery approaches additional to policies that increase meal access. In addition, they have explored inequitable implementation of recent federal meal standard flexibilities resulting in lower quality food being served.

Dr. Sarah Moreland-Russell
Dr. Dan Ferris
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Nutrients is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • food insecurity
  • equity
  • school food programs
  • school food policy
  • child and youth well-being
  • school breakfast program
  • national school lunch program

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

15 pages, 821 KiB  
Article
“Salt and Eat It or No Salt and Trash It?” Shifts in Support for School Meal Program Flexibilities in Public Comments
by Sarah Moreland-Russell, Natasha Zimmermann, Jessica Gannon, Dan Ferris, Charles Alba and Rebekah R. Jacob
Nutrients 2025, 17(5), 839; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17050839 - 28 Feb 2025
Viewed by 706
Abstract
Background: The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was passed in 2010 to update nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs to be in accordance with evidence-based guidelines. In 2017 and 2020, the United States Department of Agriculture proposed flexibilities to the [...] Read more.
Background: The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act was passed in 2010 to update nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs to be in accordance with evidence-based guidelines. In 2017 and 2020, the United States Department of Agriculture proposed flexibilities to the nutrition standards for milk, whole grains, and sodium. Objective: This study examines the positions used by stakeholders in support for or opposition to the proposed rules. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal qualitative content analysis of public comments posted to the U.S. Federal Register in response to the USDA’s proposed rules in 2017 and 2020. All public comments submitted by individuals and organizations were analyzed (n = 7323, 2017 and n = 2513, 2020). Results: Results indicated three categories of arguments: (1) comments favoring the original law, (2) comments favoring flexibilities, and (3) other. In both comment periods, constituents opposed the implementation of flexibilities, while schools and manufacturers/industry predominately supported them. Academic and advocacy organizations opposed the original proposed change (2017) but relaxed their position in 2020. Conclusions: Any flexibility to the required nutritional standards of school meals has the potential to affect the health trajectory of youth. It is imperative to understand how stakeholders view this issue and inform policy change. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to Food Security)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 392 KiB  
Article
Are Cooked Nutritious School Lunches Associated with Improved Attendance? Findings from the 2022–2023 Tasmanian School Lunch Project
by Kylie J. Smith, Verity Cleland, Kate Chappell, Brooklyn Fraser, Laura Sutton, Fiona Proudfoot, Julie Dunbabin and Kim Jose
Nutrients 2024, 16(19), 3393; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16193393 - 6 Oct 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1745
Abstract
Background/Objectives: During 2022–2023, the School Lunch Project (SLP) provided free nutritious cooked lunches 1–4 days per week to Kinder to Grade 10 students attending 30 schools in areas of high disadvantage in Tasmania, Australia. This analysis examined if the SLP was associated with [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: During 2022–2023, the School Lunch Project (SLP) provided free nutritious cooked lunches 1–4 days per week to Kinder to Grade 10 students attending 30 schools in areas of high disadvantage in Tasmania, Australia. This analysis examined if the SLP was associated with student attendance. Methods: Staff (teachers, support staff, and principals) from 12 schools completed an online survey and/or participated in focus groups/interviews. Government-held, objectively measured, grade-level attendance data were provided for 17 SLP and 11 matched comparison schools for 2018–2023. Linear mixed models compared attendance on school lunch and non-school lunch days in SLP schools. Difference-in-difference regression compared attendance between SLP and comparison schools. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results: Sixty-five staff completed surveys, where 22% reported that increased attendance was a benefit of the SLP. Similar findings were observed in the staff focus groups/interviews (N = 51). Mean attendance was similar on school lunch and non-school lunch days among the SLP schools during 2022 (difference: 0.04, 95% CI: −0.5, 0.6) and 2023 (difference 0.1, 95% CI: −0.2, 0.4) and similar between SLP and comparison schools (average treatment effect in the treated: 1.2, 95% CI: −0.7, 3.0). Conclusions: The SLP was perceived by some staff to improve attendance but was not associated with objectively measured attendance examined at the grade level. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to Food Security)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 683 KiB  
Article
Bridging the Gap in Policy Implementation through a Health Equity Lens: Insights from a 2-Year Study on Measurement Development
by Gabriella M. McLoughlin, Chelsea R. Singleton, Callie Walsh-Bailey, Rachel Inman and Lindsey Turner
Nutrients 2024, 16(19), 3357; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16193357 - 2 Oct 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1583
Abstract
Background: Policy implementation measurement lacks an equity focus, which limits understanding of how policies addressing health inequities, such as Universal School Meals (USM) can elicit intended outcomes. We report findings from an equity-focused measurement development study, which had two aims: (1) identify key [...] Read more.
Background: Policy implementation measurement lacks an equity focus, which limits understanding of how policies addressing health inequities, such as Universal School Meals (USM) can elicit intended outcomes. We report findings from an equity-focused measurement development study, which had two aims: (1) identify key constructs related to the equitable implementation of school health policies and (2) establish face and content validity of measures assessing key implementation determinants, processes, and outcomes. Methods: To address Aim 1, study participants (i.e., school health policy experts) completed a survey to rate the importance of constructs identified from implementation science and health equity by the research team. To accomplish Aim 2, the research team developed survey instruments to assess the key constructs identified from Aim 1 and conducted cognitive testing of these survey instruments among multiple user groups. The research team iteratively analyzed the data; feedback was categorized into “easy” or “moderate/difficult” to facilitate decision-making. Results: The Aim 1 survey had 122 responses from school health policy experts, including school staff (n = 76), researchers (n = 22), trainees (n = 3), leaders of non-profit organizations (n = 6), and others (n = 15). For Aim 2, cognitive testing feedback from 23 participants was predominantly classified as “easy” revisions (69%) versus “moderate/difficult” revisions (31%). Primary feedback themes comprised (1) comprehension and wording, (2) perceived lack of control over implementation, and (3) unclear descriptions of equity in questions. Conclusions: Through adaptation and careful dissemination, these tools can be shared with implementation researchers and practitioners so they may equitably assess policy implementation in their respective settings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to Food Security)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 250 KiB  
Article
Urban–Rural Differences in School Districts’ Local Wellness Policies and Policy Implementation Environments
by Swati Iyer, Timothy J. Walker, Alexandra L. MacMillan Uribe, Chad D. Rethorst, Rebecca A. Seguin-Fowler and Jacob Szeszulski
Nutrients 2024, 16(6), 801; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16060801 - 11 Mar 2024
Viewed by 2307
Abstract
Higher rates of obesity in rural compared to urban districts suggest environmental differences that affect student health. This study examined urban–rural differences in districts’ local wellness policies (LWPs) and LWP implementation environments. Cross-sectional data from two assessments in Texas were analyzed. In assessment [...] Read more.
Higher rates of obesity in rural compared to urban districts suggest environmental differences that affect student health. This study examined urban–rural differences in districts’ local wellness policies (LWPs) and LWP implementation environments. Cross-sectional data from two assessments in Texas were analyzed. In assessment one, each district’s LWP was reviewed to see if 16 goals were included. In assessment two, an audit was conducted to identify the presence of a wellness plan (a document with recommendations for implementing LWPs), triennial LWP assessment, and school health advisory councils (SHACs) on the district website. Rural districts’ LWPs had a smaller number of total goals (B = −2.281, p = 0.014), nutrition education goals (B = −0.654, p = 0.005), and other school-based activity goals (B = −0.675, p = 0.001) in their LWPs, compared to urban districts. Rural districts also had lower odds of having a wellness plan (OR = 0.520, 95% CI = 0.288–0.939), p = 0.030) and a SHAC (OR = 0.201, 95% CI = 0.113–0.357, p < 0.001) to support LWP implementation, compared to urban districts. More resources may be needed to create effective SHACs that can help develop and implement LWPs in rural areas. Important urban–rural differences exist in Texas LWPs and LWP implementation environments. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutrition Policy and Programs in Educational Settings: Equitable Approaches to Food Security)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop