Policy Analysis of Standards for Institutional Purchasing of Food by State Government

Project Reports & Products

Background

European countries and some US states and cities have begun to establish policies and standards for the healthfulness of foods that are purchased with public monies. See:

Public Sector Food Procurement Initiative: http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/policy/publicsectorfood/documents/psfpi-putting-into-practice.pdf
Smarter Food Procurement in the Public Sector: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmpubacc/357/357.pdf
New York City: http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_agency_food_standards.pdf
Montana: http://www.growmontana.ncat.org/docs/3Ch1_co.pdf

Project Description

Purpose:: To provide a deep policy review on the idea of creating standards for institutional purchasing of food by state government so that the advocacy decisions of the Washington State Coalition for Childhood Obesity and other interested parties will be well informed.

Objectives: Between January 8, 2009 and March 16, 2009, the graduate students in the Public Health Nutrition class at the University of Washington School of Public Health will:

Apply the 5 steps of Gerston’s Policy Analysis Framework to the issue of nutrition standards for food procurement by state government.

Identify the problem

Describe the relevant background and context of the problem

Conduct a stakeholder analysis

Identify and assess policy options

Make recommendations

Create a Report for the Washington State Coalition for Childhood Obesity and other interested parties with the results of the policy analysis.
Create an Advocacy Fact Sheet for an audience of policy makers.
Prepare and deliver a presentation that will highlight the findings of the policy analysis and its implications for action.

Phase I: Conduct the First Four Steps of Policy analysis

Team A: Identify the problem

What evidence is there that foods purchased (and served) by state agencies need improvement?
What evidence is there for benefits of access to healthy foods in venues such as those where food is provided by state agencies? (healthy foods at worksites, corrections institutions, state hospitals, etc. and their connection to health behaviors, other behaviors, health and other outcomes)
Are there particular issues for the food served to some vulnerable populations (children, adolescents, developmentally disabled, etc.)?
How important is it for government to set the pace - be a model - when it comes to food purchasing.

Team B: Describe the relevant background and context of the problem

How much money is spent on food by state agencies each year?
Who is being fed?
What would be the cost differential by improving the foods purchased by state agencies?
What are the barriers to legislation, executive order or regulations that specify nutrition standards for state procurement?

Team C. Conduct a Stakeholder Analysis

Who are the stakeholder groups for this kind of initiative?
What are their biases and assumptions?
Which stakeholders would support this policy approach? Who would oppose?
What potential policy components would be most accepted? Most controversial?

Team D: Identify and assess policy recommendations

What nutrition standards are currently being used to define “healthy foods”? What are the pros and cons of these standards? Are these standards applicable to public and institutional settings?
What food purchasing policies are recommended by state and national advocacy groups for access to healthy foods and obesity prevention? What is the evidence given for these recommendations?
- What policies are in place in other states? What do we know about their effectiveness?
- What recommendations and/or policies are currently in place in Washington State? What do we know about their effectiveness?
Develop a comprehensive list of policy recommendations that, if possible, are categorized in some way.

All Teams

Identify key leaders in this area
Compile list of questions for these key leaders that will help to complete the analysis
Establish interview protocol
Conduct interviews, distribute results to teams

Phase II: Compile Findings, Present to Class & Develop Recommendations

Each team comes prepared to share results of the analysis with the class. The class will develop a list of major findings, apply Policy Development Criteria to choose policies and approaches to recommend and develop suggested next steps for moving toward policy to support the recommendations

Phase III: Prepare Reports and Presentation

Full report

Front Section	Title page Table of Contents Acknowledgements List of student authors
Methods Section	Approaches to first four steps of policy analysis Approaches to developing recommendations
Results for Each Analysis Step	Present the results for each of the four steps as described above, provide a summary statement at the end of each section Summarize findings at the end of this section
Recommendations:	Major Recommendations that emerge from the analysis - for each recommendation include: why this recommendation is made pros and cons to the recommendation, including barriers to implementing suggested next steps for moving toward policy to support the recommendations
Back Section	References Appendices: data tables, instruments, etc.

Summary - 1 page

Use bullets, bar charts, white space, etc. to make it easy to read
Content:
Purpose of analysis (1 sentence)
Major findings that emerge from the analysis (paragraph or 7-8 bullets)
Recommendations: short paragraph or bullets
Acknowledgments section: Vic Colman and others who provided insights and guidance

Advocacy Brief

The purpose of the brief is to convince the target audience of the
urgency of the current problem and the need to adopt the preferred
alternative or course of action outlined and therefore, serve as an
impetus for action. The basic elements include:

Statement of the problem (making the case)
Understanding the status quo
Refuting obvious oppositional arguments also useful
Proposed solution(s)
Rationale
Include information on implementation issues: operational, evaluation and enforcement
Cost information (if available)
Stakeholder support
Contact information

45 minute PowerPoint presentation

Slides to follow standard rules for professional ppt presentations (not more than 4-5 bullets per page, not more than 2 slides in a row with just words, no distracting templates or auditory/visual effects, not to be read verbatim by presenter, etc.
Content to follow that of report

Sample Public Health Reports and Advocacy Briefs:

Hepatitis C

HIV Reporting Systems

Immunization Program

Early Hearing Loss Detection, Diagnosis and Intervention (EHDDI)

Timeline

Week	Date	Activity
1	1/8	Introduction to Project Victor Colman, JD, President Uncommon Solutions and the Washington State Childhood Obesity Prevention Coalition & Robbi Kay Norman, Vice President Uncommon Solutions Policy Development: Conceptual framework Review of project and expectations
PHASE I: First Steps of Policy Analysis
2	1/15	Team A: Identify the Problem Team B: Describe the Relevant Background and Context Team C: Conduct a Stakeholder Analysis Team D: Identify and Assess Policy Recommendations
3	1/22
4	1/29
5	2/5

PHASE II: Class Discussion

2/12

All Teams present findings to class

Class develops list of major findings
Class applies Policy Development Criteria to choose policies and approaches to recommend
Class develops suggested next steps for moving toward policy to support the recommendations

Agenda for Class Session

PHASE III: Prepare Communications Tools & Deliver Results

2/19

New Teams prepare

Report and Summary
Advocacy Brief
Presentation

2/26

3/5

3/12

Final

Mar. 16

10:30-12:20 p.m.

Presentation to Stakeholders

Evaluation

	Points
Group
Process
Team Management: Team members communicate well, plan ahead to avoid last minute crises, seek appropriate outside help when needed, divide up workload so that all have a chance to contribute.	15
Analysis explorations are completed in a timely, respectful and thorough way.	10
Qualitative & qualitative data are organized and analyzed with rigorous methods	15
Final Products
Content of final products reflects strong understanding of policy situation and methodologies used in the project.	20
Recommendations made in the final products are feasible, based in evidence and based in the findings from the work done for the project.	10
Report, summary and advocacy brief are concise, well edited and attractively presented.	20
Presentation is professional, well organized, well timed and carefully planned and practiced.	10
Individual
Successful participation in each phase of analysis and dissemination.	35
Active participation and engagement in group discussions in class.	10
Rating of individual effort by other members of group	50
Professional and respectful interactions with mentors and team members	5
	200

Return to Nutrition 531 Homepage