Client Choice Distribution Model Is Associated with Less Leftover Food in Urban Food Pantries

Abstract

Objectives Assessing client-level food waste is a priority for hunger relief organizations to effectively address food insecurity. Our objectives were: 1) to measure the amount of, and reasons for leftover food at the household level after receiving food from urban food pantries; 2) to assess differences in the amount of leftover food associated with different food pantry distribution models. Methods This was a prospective, observational study. Food-pantry clients (n = 53) were surveyed from four food pantries in Baltimore, MD. 28 of those clients were followed-up with 2 weeks later. Half of the follow-up sample used a client-choice food pantry in which clients select their own food, while the other half received pre-packed bags. At baseline, we recorded the brand, type, and weight of each product in client bags, and grouped them into Food Assortment Scoring Tool (FAST) categories. FAST scores were calculated for each bag by multiplying each category's gross weight share by a healthfulness parameter and summing the categories. At follow-up, clients estimated the percentage of each product that was consumed by their household, and reported what happened to the unused portion, and why it was unused. Results The average client choice bag weighed 27.8 ± 14.8 lbs, whereas the average pre-packed bag weighed 18.3 ± 5.3 lbs. Clients from client-choice food pantries had 22.6% of their bag leftover at follow-up; clients from traditional pantries had 34.1% of their bag leftover (P = .0375). At baseline, FAST scores were higher among traditional bags (70.3 ± 5.2) compared to client choice bags (63.5 ± 7.3) (P = .007). FAST scores of foods client-choice visitors used by follow-up was 66.7 ± 7.8, higher than scores of their baseline food selections (P = .014), suggesting use of healthy foods first. The greatest proportion of leftover food was beverages. The smallest proportion of leftover food was processed fruits and vegetables. The most common reason for not using an item was “Plan to use later” (80% of leftover items). Conclusions Food pantries distributing foods via a prepackaged bag model should consider switching to a client choice method to reduce leftover food, which may eventually be wasted. Further research should expand on this association using larger sample sizes and follow-up periods >2 weeks. Funding Sources Funded by the Bloomberg American Health Initiative Evidence Generation Awards.

The Impact of COVID‐19 on Consumer Food Waste

“…However, distribution of boxes where the assortment of foods is selected by the vendor rather than by the patron may increase waste compared to emergency food outlets that permit patrons to select their own combination of items. For example, Pruden et al (2020) note that emergency food clients who receive fixed bundles of food (i.e., bundles chosen by the local agency) report using 12 percentage points less of the distributed food than clients who were permitted autonomy of food choice. Hence, actions by USDA and participating emergency food providers that increase the variety or customizability of these boxes to meet patron preferences may ensure fewer items are wasted in patron homes.…”

A Qualitative Examination of the Detroit Community Food Response to COVID-19

“…Although not specifically measured in this study, the loss of client-choice models may have disproportionally affected food-insecure households that have special dietary needs. Given that client-choice pantries are overwhelmingly preferred by clients [35] and that it offers users a more dignified experience that can also reduce food waste [36][37][38][39], the need for a charitable feeding system that can address both client preferences and public safety is stressed more than ever during future health crises. Some of the perceived challenges reported by organizations provide further information for addressing food insecurity in future crises.…”

Untitled

“…Client-choice pantries offer many benefits to the households they serve, who frequently prefer the ability to select their food items (Remley et al, 2010;Remley et al, 2019). Offering client choice gives clients more control and dignity over their food choices (Wilson et al, 2017), and has also been linked to a reduction in pantry and household food waste (Pruden et al, 2020;Remley et al, 2010). The nutritional value of food offered at client-choice pantries may also be higher compared to traditional pantries, due to clients requesting fresh food items (Bryan et al, 2019).…”