Healthy store programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), but not the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), are associated with corner store healthfulness

Abstract

In response to lack of access to healthy foods, many low-income communities are instituting local healthy corner store programs. Some stores also participate in the United States Department of Agriculture's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This study used two assessment tools to compare the healthfulness of offerings at stores participating in local healthy store programs (upgraded stores), WIC, and/or SNAP to that of similar non-participating stores.Based on store audits conducted in 315 New Jersey corner stores in 2014, we calculated healthy food availability scores using subsections of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores (NEMS-CS-Availability) and a short-form corner store audit tool (SCAT). We used multivariable regression to examine associations between program participation and scores on both instruments.Adjusting for store and block group characteristics, stores participating in a local healthy store program had significantly higher SCAT scores than did non-participating stores (upgraded: M = 3.18, 95% CI 2.65–3.71; non-upgraded: M = 2.52, 95% CI 2.32–2.73); scores on the NEMS-CS-Availability did not differ (upgraded: M = 12.8, 95% CI 11.6–14.1; non-upgraded: M = 12.5, 95% CI 12.0–13.0). WIC-participating stores had significantly higher scores compared to non-participating stores on both tools. Stores participating in SNAP only (and not in WIC) scored significantly lower on both instruments compared to non-SNAP stores.WIC-participating and non-SNAP corner stores had higher healthfulness scores on both assessment tools. Upgraded stores had higher healthfulness scores compared to non-upgraded stores on the SCAT.

Availability, quality and price of produce in low-income neighbourhood food stores in California raise equity issues

“…Consistent with earlier studies ( 20 ) , our analysis found that many convenience stores participating in SNAP fail to provide a wide variety of fruits and vegetables; but contrary to the previous study, our results find that SNAP stores perform better than stores not participating in SNAP or WIC. Consistent with a 2016 study of corner stores ( 21 ) , our data find that WIC participation (along with SNAP) of small groceries and convenience stores is more highly associated with produce availability and quality than SNAP participation alone or non-participation in either programme. Recently, efforts to revise SNAP retailer standards were undertaken at the federal level ( 26 ) .…”

“…Studies have shown that many small and mid-sized food stores participating in SNAP carry a limited selection of healthy foods ( 20 ) . One recent study in New Jersey found that participation in WIC, but not SNAP, was associated with better availability of healthy foods in corner stores ( 21 ) . Studies describing differences in food availability in WIC- and/or SNAP-accepting stores are relatively limited.…”

Patterns of food and physical activity environments related to children's food and activity behaviors: A latent class analysis

“…Children living in High Intersection & Parks-Moderate Density & Food neighborhoods were also more than twice as likely to be overweight or obese compared to children in the Low PA-Low Food class. Food and PA environmental factors have previously been found to play a role in children’s weight status (DeWeese, Ohri-Vachaspati 2015, Ohri-Vachaspati et al 2015, Tang et al 2014, Ohri-Vachaspati et al 2013). The increased likelihood of overweight and obesity in the neighborhoods with a greater prevalence of food outlets is important to consider when formulating policies to create healthier communities.…”

“…Healthy corner store initiatives continue to launch in neighborhoods across the US as community partners desire an increase in healthy food access (Gittelsohn, Rowan & Gadhoke 2012). These healthy store programs encourage small-store owners to stock and promote more foods with greater nutritional value (The Food Trust, Philadelphia Corner Store Network & Get Healthy Philly 2014); stores participating in these programs have been shown to stock a healthier array of foods (DeWeese et al 2016). Middle and high school students’ weight outcomes have been shown to be inversely associated with the presence within a quarter mile of school of a small grocery store with a selection of healthy options (Tang et al 2014).…”

The unhealthy food environment does not modify the association between obesity and participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in Los Angeles County

“…Similarly, Shannon [8] found that in low-income, minority neighborhoods in Minnesota, 46% of SNAP redemptions take place in convenience stores. In addition, Laska et al [25] found that SNAP-authorized small- to mid-size retailers in Minneapolis- St. Paul, Minnesota, did not stock a variety of healthy foods, particularly fresh foods and DeWeese et al [26] found that SNAP-authorized corner stores in New Brunswick, New Jersey stock less healthy foods compared to non-SNAP vendors. Even though these geographical areas are not directly comparable to Los Angeles, we anticipate SNAP participants living in low-income and minority neighborhoods to have similar food accessibility issues as well as similar redemption and food purchasing patterns across the US.…”