Measuring the Effects of a Demonstration to Reduce Childhood Food Insecurity: A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Nevada Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Project

Investigating the Feasibility of a Restaurant Delivery Service to Improve Food Security among College Students Experiencing Marginal Food Security, a Head-to-Head Trial with Grocery Store Gift Cards

“…While we were unable to identify studies that investigated how interventions improved the food security status of college students, our results mostly contrast with findings from recent food insecurity interventions designed to improve the food security status of children. Interventions including $40 a month in SNAP benefits [ 30 ], boxes of food worth $37 plus $15 of vouchers to purchase fruits and vegetables [ 31 ], and from $1–$122 of SNAP benefits based on income and distance to the nearest grocery store [ 32 ] were all found to have no significant impacts on the children’s food security status. The intervention that did improve food security status for school-aged children is the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children pilot program which provided $60 or $30 per child, per month during the summer months [ 33 ].…”

Guest Editor's Response

“…They cite the social determinants of a health topic area of the Healthy People 2020 monitoring effort that notes, "Food insecurity is a key issue in the Economic Stability domain." 4 Another study in the special issue, by Gleason and colleagues, 5 which…”

“…found null results for a $40 monthly boost to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits in Nevada, also notes the role of improving broader economic conditions regionally and concluded, "Future research should explore the role of the economic context, children's ages, and household income in determining how increases in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits influence food insecurity." 5 A third study in the special issue, by Chojnacki and colleagues, 6 which found null results for a benefit supplement with varying dollar values in Kentucky, reflects on the economics literature seeking to understand the role of in-kind and cash income sources in supporting household demand for food and nonfood spending needs. [6][7][8] Gordon's letter offers an important lesson.…”